Cleared out a few of those branches (at least the ones that I put up there in the first place). Still have the new-levels branch (not sure about), 2.0-beta1 (sounds rather outdated), and LOG4J2-609 (still looks to be in progress).
On 23 September 2014 12:52, Matt Sicker <boa...@gmail.com> wrote: > It doesn't delete history ever unless you jump through hoops to do so. > > On 23 September 2014 10:41, Gary Gregory <garydgreg...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> On Tue, Sep 23, 2014 at 9:43 AM, Remko Popma <remko.po...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> >>> I deleted the topic branch for LOG4J2-431 because it has been merged >>> into master so we don't need the bookmark any more. >>> >>> I gather that it is a common workflow to delete topic branches like this >>> after the work is done and they're merged into master. Shall we adopt that >>> workflow also? >>> >>> LOG4J2-577 and LOG4J2-809 are also closed in Jira. Does that mean that >>> the topic branches for these issues can be deleted? >>> >> >> Does that mean that code is 100% gone (after GC'd) because it is not >> reachable from a Git HEAD? >> >> Gary >> >> >>> Sent from my iPhone >>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: log4j-dev-unsubscr...@logging.apache.org >>> For additional commands, e-mail: log4j-dev-h...@logging.apache.org >>> >>> >> >> >> -- >> E-Mail: garydgreg...@gmail.com | ggreg...@apache.org >> Java Persistence with Hibernate, Second Edition >> <http://www.manning.com/bauer3/> >> JUnit in Action, Second Edition <http://www.manning.com/tahchiev/> >> Spring Batch in Action <http://www.manning.com/templier/> >> Blog: http://garygregory.wordpress.com >> Home: http://garygregory.com/ >> Tweet! http://twitter.com/GaryGregory >> > > > > -- > Matt Sicker <boa...@gmail.com> > -- Matt Sicker <boa...@gmail.com>
