On Tue, 27 Feb 2018 14:36:08 -0600 "Edward K. Ream" <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 27, 2018 at 2:19 PM, Matt Wilkie <[email protected]> wrote: > > Would it be easier to invert the process, and have dedicated releases > > branches and then master never needs to be frozen? > > Anything is possible, but I don't see how doing all the work outside > of master is any improvement. At some point we have to freeze > *something*. Furthermore, the scheme you suggests seems to make > master almost irrelevant, which does not seem reasonable. > > Edward I think with the release branch approach master is the place for finished projects being tested, sort of what it is now, it's just that instead of people having to switch between "ok to use master" and "not ok to use master", it's always ok to use master - all you have to do is not put new breaky stuff in the release branch, which no one would do by accident anyway. Cheers -Terry -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "leo-editor" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/leo-editor. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
