On 10/09/2014 09:05 AM, Austin Macdonald wrote: > 1. Development branches should be stored on the developer's GitHub fork. > Pull requests will take place from there, preventing pollution of Pulp's > branch list.
+1 > 2. Bugfix branch names no longer need a user name since they are on the > developer's fork. Branches should be named by their BZ number and an > optional message, ex. `123456 - fixes that bug`. Also the primary commit > message of this branch should follow the same convention of `<bz id> - > commit message`. > > 3. Feature branches should similarly not include user names. Feature > branches should start with `feature/` to differentiate them from bug > branches, ex. `feature/cool-thing`. I think we shouldn't have any official policy as to how people should name branches in their own forks of Pulp. It's their namespace, so I think we should allow them the choice to manage it as they see fit. These are reasonable suggestions, however, I just don't think we should state them as requirements.
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ Pulp-list mailing list [email protected] https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-list
