+1 from me as well, keeping unused branches around is only confusing.
Best regards,
Alessandro
On Sun 22 Jan 2023, 22:58 Julian Hyde, wrote:
> +1
>
> There’s probably a tag for each release but let’s make sure before we drop
> the branch. If any branch just has a ‘prepare for next iteration’
Sergey Nuyanzin created CALCITE-5489:
Summary: Cannot convert TIMESTAMP literal to class
org.apache.calcite.avatica.util.TimeUnit
Key: CALCITE-5489
URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CALCITE-5489
+1
There’s probably a tag for each release but let’s make sure before we drop the
branch. If any branch just has a ‘prepare for next iteration’ commit following
the release tag I’m fine dropping that commit.
Julian
> On Jan 22, 2023, at 1:05 PM, Francis Chuang wrote:
>
> +1 for dropping
+1 for dropping them. We should do this for both calcite and
calcite-avatica (there shouldn't be any dangling branches for
calcite-avatica-go).
On 23/01/2023 7:13 am, Stamatis Zampetakis wrote:
Hi all,
Apart from the main, site, and possibly one or two other branches, all the
rest are not
Hi all,
Apart from the main, site, and possibly one or two other branches, all the
rest are not used by anyone unless I am missing something.
Many of them (branch-X.Y) were generated during past releases but this
pattern stopped some time ago.
It is not a big deal keeping them around but it can
