Hi, I regularly commit all stuff in Apache Ignite to the ASF repository, even development branches or intermediate result. A number of committers (not all of them) do the same. Sometimes we clean up old feature branches to reduce repository size and initial checkout time for newcomers.
Branch naming is project-NNNN, where NNNN is a ticket number, so it is almost always easy to say, to which ticket branch is related to. Same rules are applied to PR naming, so I suggest to name PRs as TRAINING-NNN: Description, and branches as training-NNN. Therefore -0.5 from my side to prohibiting feature branches in ASF-repo. Lars, could you please share arguments about why we should avoid pushing to the origin? Sincerely, Dmitriy Pavlov ср, 15 мая 2019 г. в 21:30, Christofer Dutz <[email protected]>: > -1 > > As a lot of work will have to be done in a collaborative fashion. This > should be allowed to happen in the repo and not outside. > > So in not against external prs, I'm against forbidding internal ones. > > Chris > > Outlook für Android<https://aka.ms/ghei36> herunterladen > > ________________________________ > From: Kenneth Knowles <[email protected]> > Sent: Wednesday, May 15, 2019 7:54:01 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: Git branches > > +1 to fork & PR. It works great. > > *From: *Lars Francke <[email protected]> > *Date: *Wed, May 15, 2019 at 9:58 AM > *To: * <[email protected]> > > Hi, > > > > I'm not sure how other projects do this (well, I do, but not all of them) > > but I'd be in favor of keeping the Git branches we have clean (i.e. not > > having feature branches in the Apache repository). > > > > They tend to be forgotten, they are often not documented and can be > > confusing. I'd be in favor of developing in your own fork and then > > submitting a PR. > > > > What do others think? > > > > Cheers, > > Lars > > >
