which caused the last problem. If this is possible
>> here, it would probably fix most cases.
>>
>> Original message
>> From: Gilles
>> Date: 05/31/2016 9:26 AM (GMT-05:00)
>> To: dev@commons.apache.org
>> Subject: Re: [math] Reposit
t
> think twice about it, which caused the last problem. If this is possible
> here, it would probably fix most cases.
>
> Original message ----
> From: Gilles
> Date: 05/31/2016 9:26 AM (GMT-05:00)
> To: dev@commons.apache.org
> Subject: Re: [math] Reposi
On Tue, May 31, 2016 at 5:43 PM, Rob Tompkins wrote:
> On May 31, 2016, at 10:21 AM, Matt Sicker wrote:
> >
> > Why not just rename master to something like stable, then rename develop
> to
> > master? Less confusing to people who don't know about git-flow.
>
> Generally when I think about an ar
- Original message
From: Gilles
Date: 05/31/2016 9:26 AM (GMT-05:00)
To: dev@commons.apache.org
Subject: Re: [math] Repository Policy
On Tue, 31 May 2016 13:22:10 +0200, Emmanuel Bourg wrote:
> Le 31/05/2016 à 12:41, Gilles a écrit :
>
>> Are you positive that people will
On May 31, 2016, at 10:21 AM, Matt Sicker wrote:
>
> Why not just rename master to something like stable, then rename develop to
> master? Less confusing to people who don't know about git-flow.
Generally when I think about an arbitrary github project I would think that the
“master” branch refl
Why not just rename master to something like stable, then rename develop to
master? Less confusing to people who don't know about git-flow.
On 31 May 2016 at 03:58, Gilles wrote:
> On Tue, 31 May 2016 09:34:25 +0200, Emmanuel Bourg wrote:
>
>> Le 31/05/2016 à 03:37, er...@apache.org a écrit :
>>
On Tue, 31 May 2016 13:22:10 +0200, Emmanuel Bourg wrote:
Le 31/05/2016 à 12:41, Gilles a écrit :
Are you positive that people will not continue updating "master"?
Well that depends on the modification pushed:
- for trivial changes like updating the version of a maven plugin
there
is no poin
Le 31/05/2016 à 12:41, Gilles a écrit :
> Are you positive that people will not continue updating "master"?
Well that depends on the modification pushed:
- for trivial changes like updating the version of a maven plugin there
is no point creating a feature branch, it can be committed directly on
On Tue, 31 May 2016 11:33:19 +0200, Emmanuel Bourg wrote:
Le 31/05/2016 à 10:58, Gilles a écrit :
It causes confusion indeed but not because it is confusing.
Rather because of years of svn usage which git vows to change IIUC.
It's confusing because it's unexpected. If you look at the GitHub
p
Le 31/05/2016 à 10:58, Gilles a écrit :
> It causes confusion indeed but not because it is confusing.
> Rather because of years of svn usage which git vows to change IIUC.
It's confusing because it's unexpected. If you look at the GitHub
projects the majority don't use this so called "git workflo
On Tue, 31 May 2016 09:34:25 +0200, Emmanuel Bourg wrote:
Le 31/05/2016 à 03:37, er...@apache.org a écrit :
Repository: commons-math
Updated Branches:
refs/heads/master ffc1caada -> 598edc127
Reverting changes on "master" as per Commons Math policy.
The corresponding changes have been porte
Le 31/05/2016 à 03:37, er...@apache.org a écrit :
> Repository: commons-math
> Updated Branches:
> refs/heads/master ffc1caada -> 598edc127
>
>
> Reverting changes on "master" as per Commons Math policy.
>
> The corresponding changes have been ported into branch "develop".
Hi all,
The reposi
12 matches
Mail list logo
