To me this looks like a light-weight naming convention, awesome! D On Wed, Mar 21, 2012 at 2:25 PM, Chad <[email protected]> wrote: > 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
_______________________________________________ Wikitech-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
