Master-ok sounds better than master. It conveys the intent very clearly. -- Regards, Janmejay
PS: Please blame the typos in this mail on my phone's uncivilized soft keyboard sporting it's not-so-smart-assist technology. On Dec 16, 2014 5:14 PM, "Rainer Gerhards" <[email protected]> wrote: > HI all, > > we decided that master branch receives updates only after testbench run. > How important is this to us that this branch is named "master"? I ask > because almost all pull requests are done against master branch, which > means I need to manually merge them to master-candidate and close the PR as > "unmerged". > > It would probably much more efficient to have "master" be the experimental > branch, and when the testbench succeeds move it to something like > "master-ok" (or so). > > Comments? > > Rainer > _______________________________________________ > rsyslog mailing list > http://lists.adiscon.net/mailman/listinfo/rsyslog > http://www.rsyslog.com/professional-services/ > What's up with rsyslog? Follow https://twitter.com/rgerhards > NOTE WELL: This is a PUBLIC mailing list, posts are ARCHIVED by a myriad > of sites beyond our control. PLEASE UNSUBSCRIBE and DO NOT POST if you > DON'T LIKE THAT. > _______________________________________________ rsyslog mailing list http://lists.adiscon.net/mailman/listinfo/rsyslog http://www.rsyslog.com/professional-services/ What's up with rsyslog? Follow https://twitter.com/rgerhards NOTE WELL: This is a PUBLIC mailing list, posts are ARCHIVED by a myriad of sites beyond our control. PLEASE UNSUBSCRIBE and DO NOT POST if you DON'T LIKE THAT.
