Until that is resolved, you can follow the process that many of us did in CVS forever (but back then master was called HEAD :). So I usually just place a README.txt in there saying this is not the right branch, and they should check out branches for Drupal version compatibility (6.x, 7.x respectively).
Gábor On Wed, Mar 2, 2011 at 5:24 PM, Arlin Sandbulte <[email protected]> wrote: > Yes, Sam recommended the same thing in IRC. > Here is the relevant issue: > http://drupal.org/node/1074960 - Let maintainers set a default branch on git > repositories > Discussion can continue there. > > This lets module maintainers delete the master branch without creating a big > WTF when someone clones the repository that does not have a master branch, > or it does have a master branch, but it is not relevant to anything. > > On Wed, Mar 2, 2011 at 8:23 AM, Randy Fay <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> You seem to be talking about the default 'master' branch. >> >> In general, we recommend not using a 'master' branch any more. >> >> For a release branch (one that can have a dev release following it), use a >> branch name like 7.x-1.x >> >> For a topic branch, you can use any name you want, but it's often good to >> use a naming convention. >> >> For local topic branches I use something like [description]_[issue] or >> [description]_[issue]/[comment_number]. So for example, >> fix_broken_headers_99394 or fix_broken_headers_99394/22. >> >> For topic branches that you will push up, you may want to use a username >> on the front in some cases, to point out who the "owner" is. Then a branch >> could be named like >> >> rfay/fix_broken_headers_99394 >> >> I did a recent screencast about pushing and deleting topic branches, >> http://randyfay.com/node/96, that might be useful. >> >> -Randy >> >> On Tue, Mar 1, 2011 at 12:25 PM, Arlin Sandbulte >> <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> There is a lot of discussion and ideas about git work flows right now. >>> It will probably take some time for best practices to evolve and gain >>> acceptance on d.o >>> >>> Regarding the main branch, others have said it seems pretty useless when >>> a release (dev in particular) cannot be attached to it anyway. >>> I think the only thing 'special' about main is that it is the default >>> checked out branch when cloning a repository. >>> So, what to do with it... >>> >>> I like the way the rules project seems to be handling it: >>> Just have a readme on the main branch noting that all files are located >>> on other branches and all work should be done there. (Even though this >>> might be a carryover from the good ole CVS days.) >>> Any other suggestions or words of wisdom? >> >> >> >> -- >> Randy Fay >> Drupal Module and Site Development >> [email protected] >> +1 970.462.7450 >> > >
