> > If we adopt the naming conventions of using pr in the branch name then the > fact it is a PR is self referential in nay context command line/web/tablet > >> These random named and created branches just confuse people who clone the >> repo. > > I agree with is in part, naming as in the OS is key > > 'master_imxrt' is too master_imxrt > `stage` is too vague > `master-pr-imxrt_imxrt_fixes` - Says what it is: A PR against the branch > master that fixes the imxrt. > > master has always been master in the context of nuttx and as well on gitub as > the default branch.
we should consider adopting a naming convention that classifies the category of the PR. BitBucket’s scheme works very well and helps keep live (yet to be reviewed/merged) branches organized: bugfix/<descriptive-name-of-bug> a simple fix for some bug in OS, driver, or app... hotfix/<descriptive-name-of-bug> an emergency fix to some bug in a released version feature/<descriptive-name-of-new-feature> add a new driver, or new feature releases/<number-or-descriptive-name> if a release need to be patched, the hotfix first applies here, then can be cherry-picked and merged to master. Regards, -david
