I think it's fair to say that exceptions might arise. Branches can stick
around as long as we want them. They'll start to clutter the place up
eventually if we don't delete any of them, but there's no deadline for
getting rid of them.
Something really big, like P6, for example, will probably start as a
branch, but we might decide to keep it around, do a full merge into master,
or maybe even just make it into master and master into "P5".
On Tue, Sep 29, 2015 at 11:52 AM, Syd Bauman
I'd be lying if I said I understood this, but my instinct is that it's not completely predictable when we might want to keep the revision history for a develop-a-feature branch and when we wouldn't. I suspect that, for the most part, the commit hx for such a branch is not sufficiently useful that we should keep it around. But I can imagine the opposite for a particular feature.
If we fold only the tip of a branch into master, we lose the commit hx when we delete that branch, right? Is there any particular advantage to deleting the branch? Can it be merely hidden or moved instead? -- tei-council mailing list tei-council@lists.tei-c.org http://lists.lists.tei-c.org/mailman/listinfo/tei-council
PLEASE NOTE: postings to this list are publicly archived