On Wed, Mar 21, 2012 at 2:17 PM, Diederik van Liere <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi y'all, > > With the pending git migration upon us,is this also the right time to > think about naming conventions for git branches or is there nu such a > need? > I can imagine that a branch aimed at fixing a bug could be named > B12345, or something like that. Or are 'descriptive' names good > enough? One reason to have naming conventions is that it would make it > easier in the future to run scripts to collect stats on particular > branches. That would be much harder in a complete freetext > environment. >
Having a bug number is useful and gives an immediate place to look for information. git-review uses the local branch name as the "Topic" so it's helpful for grouping things relating to a single bug in Gerrit. For features or other random things that don't have a specific bug, I prefer being nice and descriptive. Something like "config-mgmt-overhaul" or "new-feature-foobar" are clear. Something like "ui-fix" isn't. I think we should use the same naming conventions like we do for message keys--all lowercase and using hyphens rather than spaces or underscores. Other than the branch/tag names for core, I don't think we necessarily need strong guidelines here--common sense should suffice for now. When in doubt: be verbose! -Chad _______________________________________________ Wikitech-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
