Well it basically forces you to move commits to master once you released and since that is git you can rewrite the history (caricatirally you ll just add 1 commit to master saying release-x).
If you dont want to use it what is the point having another dev dead branch - ie master? Seeing last stable release? That is a tag. Seeing last stable state - ie you update it regularly? No way to have it without the release process - we failed at it for each releases and it would be worse than using current snapshots. Le 29 janv. 2015 08:13, "Alan D. Cabrera" <l...@toolazydogs.com> a écrit : > I am dense. :) > > Can you provide an explicit example? > > > On Jan 28, 2015, at 11:09 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau <rmannibu...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > > Cause it implies history rewrite by design > > Le 29 janv. 2015 07:51, "Alan D. Cabrera" <l...@toolazydogs.com> a > écrit : > > > >> > >>> On Jan 28, 2015, at 1:59 AM, Romain Manni-Bucau <rmannibu...@gmail.com > > > >> wrote: > >>> > >>> well it is by design opposed to apache way since if it is used it is > >>> to have the ability to change commit history - if not it is really > >>> useless. > >> > >> I’m sure that I’m being dense but how is this form of branch management > >> not the apache way? > >> > >> > >> Regards, > >> Alan > >> > >> > >
