On Jun 25, 2013 5:44 PM, "Justin Mclean" <jus...@classsoftware.com> wrote: > > Hi, > > > The point is that it is generally considered bad form to work directly in > > the 'master' branch. > But not to the point of avoiding it altogether and merging as infrequently as the flex project does. > > > Provided that you a valid reason. > Here's several - there's probably more: > 1. People accidentally working in the wrong branch (has happened several times).
How does defaulting to master fix this issue? Isn't it user error? > 2. User confusion about where to get the latest code (has happened many times). Our documentation on the website very clearly shows how to checkout from the develop branch. Why are users getting confused? Do we have wrong documentation somewhere? > 3. External tools assume master is default branch by default and give wrong or confusing picture of the state of the project (eg github). This is a problem with how Apache Infra is hooking into the external tool. > 4. Outside perception is not much is happen as master branch is more visible than develop (can point to several instances of this). Better messaging? > 5. Not in line with advice of mentors. Did mentors advice us to use master branch as default? Please point to the thread? > 6. Not in line with other Apache projects. Examples? > 7. Extra work for release manager. > 8. Potential merge issues (see issues with 4.9.1 merge). > 9. Huge gap between master and develop means users can't apply patches and are either forced to live with bugs or risk using develop branch (releasing more often would help this). On the contrary. Having a develop branch ensures that bad check-in does not pollute the main codebase. With what you are suggesting, master will be as unstable as the develop branch is today. This would actually more cause more issues than solve. Thanks, Om > > Thanks, > Justin
