On Tue, Jun 25, 2013 at 5:01 PM, Justin Mclean <jus...@classsoftware.com>wrote:
> Hi, > > > [1] > http://waterstreetgm.org/git-why-you-should-never-commit-directly-to-master/ > > [2] > http://stackoverflow.com/questions/5713563/reasons-for-not-working-on-the-master-branch-in-git > > IMO both links actually express the opposite view, there a difference to > making every change in master (and making it unstable) and working in > branches but integrating frequently/after testing. Currently our master is > 3 months behind develop. > > If you read the second link it states "master contains code which is very > likely to end up in the next release of git." and that's not how we are > doing it ie we only merge into master after a release and those are very > infrequent. > > Justin The point is that it is generally considered bad form to work directly in the 'master' branch. If you want to propose to change this, I wont stop you. Provided that you a valid reason. Github showing 'master' branch as default is not a valid reason IMHO. We should not make a major change like this because of a possible quirk in GitHub (which is not our primary source repo) Thanks, Om
