Em ter 25 fev 2014, às 15:50:39, Matthew Woehlke escreveu: > On 2014-02-25 14:12, Thiago Macieira wrote: > > Also, I don't know of any project that has a CI-controlled integration. > > What does that have to do with branch naming conventions? > > I'll grant that there is variance in the exact definition of "master". > Less so in the *existence* of the same.
We chose not to have a master branch exactly so we wouldn't confuse people about what it meant. On some projects it means stable; on some it's last tagged release; on others it's the in-development version, with or without any quality control. And finally in some others like the Linux kernel and other highly distributed projects, branches are referred to by the repo name, not the branch name. (one could say, ironically, that this is the Mercurial model) So we chose to call them "dev" and "stable" to be quite clear. And that's what I said in my email: I propose it remains called "dev" for clarity of purpose. -- Thiago Macieira - thiago.macieira (AT) intel.com Software Architect - Intel Open Source Technology Center _______________________________________________ Development mailing list [email protected] http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development
