Wow, I'm elevated to a whole department! ;-) I wish I had the clones to make it true!
If the scripts are in git on code then Geert or I can update them as needed when we shift branches. Regards, John Ralls > On Nov 14, 2022, at 8:26 AM, Derek Atkins <de...@ihtfp.com> wrote: > > I have no objection to changing branch names. > > Just keep in mind that several build scripts depend on the branch names, > so if they change once, that's fine, but if they are constantly changing > (e.g. 4.x, 5.x, 4.99, 6.x, etc) then we may need to rework the scripts so > I don't have to coordinate with release-engineering when a new branch gets > created. (This dev-docs, etc). > > -derek > > On Mon, November 14, 2022 11:17 am, Geert Janssens wrote: >> This had been brewing in my mind as well, so thanks for bringing this up. >> >> When I considered alternative branch names I initially thought of "stable" >> vs "development" >> or "devel" with an optional "unstable" at times of pre-releases. >> >> However when thinking this through some more I started wondering whether >> we really >> should limit ourselves to just two (or three) branch names. >> >> We could also name our branches "4.x", "5.x" and so on to indicate the >> release series this >> branch is for. At some point we just stop using the older branches. We can >> choose to drop >> them or just leave them in the git history as it suits is best. >> >> Both naming schemes have advantages and drawbacks. I like the direct >> relationship >> between branch name and releases that will be on it for the latter scheme. >> Although I admit >> this relationship doesn't hold for the pre-releases, unless we make that a >> separate branch for >> those like eg "4.9xx". >> >> Regards, >> >> Geert >> >> Op zondag 13 november 2022 21:40:14 CET schreef john: >>> Since Geert brought up our relationship with Github I thought it timely >>> to >>> start a discussion about a related trend: The name of the git >>> repository's >>> primary branches. There's an ongoing effort in the software development >>> community for the last 25-30 years or so to remove the terms master and >>> slave; originally when used together (as in processes) but more recently >>> when used alone. This recently includes the name of the primary branch >>> in a >>> git repository. The Gitlab folks have a nice summary at >>> https://about.gitlab.com/blog/2021/03/10/new-git-default-branch-name/. >>> >>> 'Master' was the standard when we started using git 10 years ago and so >>> we >>> adopted it and still use it. Aside from the cultural sensitivity issues >>> (primarily in the United States because of our unfortunate history with >>> forced importation and enslavement of Africans) it has proved to be a >>> bit >>> confusing to new contributors. >>> >>> The new standard default is 'main'. I think that would be fine for >>> htdocs >>> where we have master and beta: Main would better express that that's the >>> branch that you see when you visit https://www.gnucash.org >>> <https://www.gnucash.org/>. The gnucash-on-foo repositories for the >>> build >>> processes have only master branches so it doesn't really matter what the >>> branch is called. >>> >>> I don't think 'main' is the right name for gnucash or gnucash-docs >>> because >>> it does nothing about the confusion factor. Note that the default branch >>> on >>> those two is maint but we still use master for the next major release's >>> branch. The most expressive titles would be current-major-release and >>> next-major-release but they're a bit wordy; OTOH just current (or curr) >>> and >>> next leave a new contributor to ask current and next what? maint is >>> concise >>> and not terrible for a branch that gets only bug fixes and small >>> features. >>> Lots of generic names for the next-major-release branch (future, devel >>> or >>> development, major-change) come to mind but I'm not sure that any of >>> them >>> clearly express the intent of the branch. >>> >>> Comments? >>> >>> Regards, >>> John Ralls >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> gnucash-devel mailing list >>> gnucash-devel@gnucash.org >>> https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-devel >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> gnucash-devel mailing list >> gnucash-devel@gnucash.org >> https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-devel >> > > > -- > Derek Atkins 617-623-3745 > de...@ihtfp.com www.ihtfp.com > Computer and Internet Security Consultant > > _______________________________________________ > gnucash-devel mailing list > gnucash-devel@gnucash.org > https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-devel _______________________________________________ gnucash-devel mailing list gnucash-devel@gnucash.org https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-devel
