Agreed. Whenever I've used git-flow in the past, the only reason we had a develop and master branch was so that it was simpler to write hotfixes against master later on. We'd delete our release branches after they were tagged and merged to master&develop, so the only ways to find what's in production are to either take the head of master or the highest numbered tag name.
On 9 June 2017 at 14:05, Gary Gregory <[email protected]> wrote: > I'm unlikely to do development on Log4jnet but I like having 'master' > instead of 'develop' for the reason Julius stated. > > Gary > > On Fri, Jun 9, 2017 at 9:07 AM, Julius Davies <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > The 'master' branch in the gitflow model is pointless (that state is > > already tracked with the 'release/*' branches). I say ditch the > 'master' > > branch and make 'develop' the default branch (e.g., the one that a fresh > > "git clone" automatically checks out). > > > > And rebase the short lived feature branches against develop before > merging > > them to make the history cleaner: > > > > git checkout feature/TKT-123 > > [do work...] > > git fetch > > git rebase origin/develop > > git push --force-with-lease > > > > > > (Honestly I prefer to rename 'develop' to 'master' because then it > matches > > the terminology of most git documentation and tutorials on the web). > > > > > > Sorry, drive by email. I've been subscribed this email list for a > decade > > but I don't think I've ever posted before. > > > > > > yours, > > > > Julius > > > > > > > > > > On Fri, Jun 9, 2017 at 8:12 AM, Dominik Psenner <[email protected]> > > wrote: > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > On 2017-05-23 08:49, Stefan Bodewig wrote: > > > > > >> Please ensure github tracks develop as the default branch when the > vote > > >> passes. > > >> > > > > > > I just filed an issue on INFRA to make this happen. This is the ticket > > for > > > it: > > > > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-14316 > > > > > > Cheers, > > > Dominik > > > > > > -- Matt Sicker <[email protected]>
