This is getting off-topic. My proposal is to ask Infra to change the default branch for comdev-site to 'main', so it is the same as the other comdev site repos.
I will also make any necessary changes to scripts and documentation for that specific repo. Sorry, but any other names are out of scope here. If anyone feels strongly enough to manage and follow through a different change, then please start your own thread. I will rephrase: Does anyone have any objections to my proposal to change the default branch for comdev-site to main? Thanks, Sebb On Sun, 2 Apr 2023 at 18:42, Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com> wrote: > > I think it's really a matter of project's choice. > > Those who use gitflow use main(master)/release/develop - they have > all well-defined meaning and it's cool for projects using it. For other > projects, main might be the default development choice if their > merge/release workflow is simpler (that's airflow's choice for example - > even if it is a code repo, this works well for us too). I personally adapt > to whatever style project uses and don't prefer one over the other - > whatever is comfortable for most of the people contributing there is cool. > This is what I love about git that it does not make opinionated choices and > every project can choose their workflow. > > J > > On Sun, Apr 2, 2023 at 7:20 PM Gary Gregory <garydgreg...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > I like release and develop. FWIW, a lot of Apache Commons components use > > release already. > > > > Gary > > > > On Sun, Apr 2, 2023, 11:06 Christofer Dutz <christofer.d...@c-ware.de> > > wrote: > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > There are many projects, where “main” contains the latest released > > version > > > and „develop“ is for development. > > > Others use “main” for development and something else for releases. > > > > > > That’s why I’m suggesting naming the threads according to what they are > > > used for. > > > > > > “main” for a developer is probably the branch he does his most work on > > > (aka “develop”). > > > “main” for a user is probably the branch that he uses for using the > > > framework (aka “release”). > > > > > > With “release” and “develop” I think it’s absolutely clear what is on > > > which branch. > > > > > > That was why I suggested it. > > > > > > Chris > > > > > > > > > Von: tison <wander4...@gmail.com> > > > Datum: Sonntag, 2. April 2023 um 14:18 > > > An: dev@community.apache.org <dev@community.apache.org> > > > Betreff: Re: Standardise on 'main' as the default branch? > > > > Name the branch, on which development happens "develop" and the one > > that > > > contains the released versions "releases". With "main" you never really > > > know what it's used for. > > > > > > To me, "main" is always "develop". > > > > > > Best, > > > tison. > > > > > > > > > sebb <seb...@gmail.com> 于2023年4月2日周日 19:34写道： > > > > > > > On Sun, 2 Apr 2023 at 09:39, Christofer Dutz < > > christofer.d...@c-ware.de> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > I would like to make a slightly different proposal. > > > > > Name the branch, on which development happens "develop" and the one > > > that > > > > contains the released versions "releases". With "main" you never really > > > > know what it's used for. > > > > > > > > I agree that main is no less ambiguous than master, but the website > > > > does not really have a development/release cycle, so I'm not sure > > > > 'release' is appropriate here. > > > > > > > > Maybe the default branch should be something like 'production' or > > > > 'live' for websites. > > > > However that would mean changing the other repos to keep in step. > > > > > > > > > But I think I brought this up multiple times before, so if be +1 on a > > > > change. > > > > > > > > Thanks! > > > > > > > > > Chris > > > > > > > > > > Gesendet von Outlook für Android<https://aka.ms/AAb9ysg> > > > > > ________________________________ > > > > > From: Willem Jiang <willem.ji...@gmail.com> > > > > > Sent: Sunday, April 2, 2023 10:19:44 AM > > > > > To: dev@community.apache.org <dev@community.apache.org> > > > > > Subject: Re: Standardise on 'main' as the default branch? > > > > > > > > > > +1 for it. > > > > > > > > > > Willem Jiang > > > > > > > > > > Twitter: willemjiang > > > > > Weibo: 姜宁willem > > > > > > > > > > On Sat, Apr 1, 2023 at 8:11 PM sebb <seb...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > All bar one of the 4 comdev Git repos use 'main' as the default > > > branch. > > > > > > > > > > > > I think we should standardise on that going forward, and change the > > > > > > default branch for comdev-site. > > > > > > > > > > > > Agreed? > > > > > > > > > > > > Sebb > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@community.apache.org > > > > > > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@community.apache.org > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@community.apache.org > > > > > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@community.apache.org > > > > > > > > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@community.apache.org > > > > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@community.apache.org > > > > > > > > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@community.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@community.apache.org
