[development] git main branch - how to use it, or not use it
gabor at hojtsy.hu
Wed Mar 2 16:48:39 UTC 2011
Until that is resolved, you can follow the process that many of us did
in CVS forever (but back then master was called HEAD :). So I usually
just place a README.txt in there saying this is not the right branch,
and they should check out branches for Drupal version compatibility
(6.x, 7.x respectively).
On Wed, Mar 2, 2011 at 5:24 PM, Arlin Sandbulte
<arlinsandbulte at gmail.com> wrote:
> Yes, Sam recommended the same thing in IRC.
> Here is the relevant issue:
> http://drupal.org/node/1074960 - Let maintainers set a default branch on git
> Discussion can continue there.
> This lets module maintainers delete the master branch without creating a big
> WTF when someone clones the repository that does not have a master branch,
> or it does have a master branch, but it is not relevant to anything.
> On Wed, Mar 2, 2011 at 8:23 AM, Randy Fay <randy at randyfay.com> wrote:
>> You seem to be talking about the default 'master' branch.
>> In general, we recommend not using a 'master' branch any more.
>> For a release branch (one that can have a dev release following it), use a
>> branch name like 7.x-1.x
>> For a topic branch, you can use any name you want, but it's often good to
>> use a naming convention.
>> For local topic branches I use something like [description]_[issue] or
>> [description]_[issue]/[comment_number]. So for example,
>> fix_broken_headers_99394 or fix_broken_headers_99394/22.
>> For topic branches that you will push up, you may want to use a username
>> on the front in some cases, to point out who the "owner" is. Then a branch
>> could be named like
>> I did a recent screencast about pushing and deleting topic branches,
>> http://randyfay.com/node/96, that might be useful.
>> On Tue, Mar 1, 2011 at 12:25 PM, Arlin Sandbulte
>> <arlinsandbulte at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> There is a lot of discussion and ideas about git work flows right now.
>>> It will probably take some time for best practices to evolve and gain
>>> acceptance on d.o
>>> Regarding the main branch, others have said it seems pretty useless when
>>> a release (dev in particular) cannot be attached to it anyway.
>>> I think the only thing 'special' about main is that it is the default
>>> checked out branch when cloning a repository.
>>> So, what to do with it...
>>> I like the way the rules project seems to be handling it:
>>> Just have a readme on the main branch noting that all files are located
>>> on other branches and all work should be done there. (Even though this
>>> might be a carryover from the good ole CVS days.)
>>> Any other suggestions or words of wisdom?
>> Randy Fay
>> Drupal Module and Site Development
>> randy at randyfay.com
>> +1 970.462.7450
More information about the development