On Tue, May 31, 2016 at 5:43 PM, Rob Tompkins wrote:
> On May 31, 2016, at 10:21 AM, Matt Sicker wrote:
> >
> > Why not just rename master to something like stable, then rename develop
> to
> > master? Less confusing to people who don't know about git-flow.
On May 31, 2016, at 10:21 AM, Matt Sicker wrote:
>
> Why not just rename master to something like stable, then rename develop to
> master? Less confusing to people who don't know about git-flow.
Generally when I think about an arbitrary github project I would think that the
Why not just rename master to something like stable, then rename develop to
master? Less confusing to people who don't know about git-flow.
On 31 May 2016 at 03:58, Gilles wrote:
> On Tue, 31 May 2016 09:34:25 +0200, Emmanuel Bourg wrote:
>
>> Le 31/05/2016 à
On Tue, 31 May 2016 09:34:25 +0200, Emmanuel Bourg wrote:
Le 31/05/2016 à 03:37, er...@apache.org a écrit :
Repository: commons-math
Updated Branches:
refs/heads/master ffc1caada -> 598edc127
Reverting changes on "master" as per Commons Math policy.
The corresponding changes have been
Le 31/05/2016 à 03:37, er...@apache.org a écrit :
> Repository: commons-math
> Updated Branches:
> refs/heads/master ffc1caada -> 598edc127
>
>
> Reverting changes on "master" as per Commons Math policy.
>
> The corresponding changes have been ported into branch "develop".
Hi all,
The