ocket8888 commented on pull request #4700: URL: https://github.com/apache/trafficcontrol/pull/4700#issuecomment-641610522
> _"There was no feature branch for Topologies..."_ > _"Our definition of feature branches is the same."_ Those statements are contradictory (so are _"There was no feature branch for Topologies..."_ and _"Every PR to master essentially is a feature branch."_ lol). What you did for Topologies was what I would call a "feature branch", because it reached across multiple components and/or API endpoints. Its scope was broader than an atomic unit of work done by one person to one aspect of one component. Your definition seems to be more closely related to the "size" of the PR than its "scope". The only way the `/servers` endpoint could be changed to not break snapshots would be if that was in the same PR (which was a relatively small change, as it turned out), and to avoid breaking Traffic Portal it would need to be in the same PR as well (although in my defence that wouldn't have been the case if TP stayed on the stable 2.0 API, which was a change I deliberately hoped to avoid making for exactly this reason when adding the 3.0 API). Which all sounds fine to me, except that I'd also call that a feature branch. I understand how to do feature branches - obviously, because I already said I'd prefer to do them going forward. You don't need to convince me, I'm on board. I just needed to know that was an option; this was just a misunderstanding. ---------------------------------------------------------------- This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service. To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the URL above to go to the specific comment. For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at: [email protected]
