El mié., 24 abr. 2019 a las 10:33, Andre Klapper (<ak...@gmx.net>) escribió:
> On Wed, 2019-04-24 at 08:43 +0200, Daniel Mustieles García wrote: > > I don't know where is the advantage of this renaming > > That is already clearly explained in > https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/geary/issues/324 Just because "master" implies an "slave" branch? Note that I'm not the only who disagrees with the change, so maybe the reason is not really clear > > > > (we don't belong to Linux kernel develpment > > And nobody ever said so, so I don't know why it's brought up. > Yes, it's mentioned in the issue: "...several projects like Rust, Django and the Linux kernel..." > > > , as exposed in #324), but coherence across modules should be kept. > > I agree that it would be good to consider renaming all master branches. > Great, but having modules with no standard name for master/trunk/whatever branch might break applications like Damned Lies, so this rename should be reconsidered, at least until we decide to rename the whole modulesed's master branch to another one. What would happen if every module maintainer decides to rename it's master branch? It will be a mess... I just think we should keep names homogeously, don't mind if it's called master, trunk... ;-) > > andre > -- > Andre Klapper | ak...@gmx.net > https://blogs.gnome.org/aklapper/ > > > _______________________________________________ > gnome-i18n mailing list > gnome-i18n@gnome.org > https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-i18n >
_______________________________________________ gnome-i18n mailing list gnome-i18n@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-i18n
