On Wednesday, 19 December 2012 at 22:30:29 UTC, Andrei
Alexandrescu wrote:
On 12/19/12 5:07 PM, deadalnix wrote:
On Wednesday, 19 December 2012 at 21:48:22 UTC, Andrei
Alexandrescu wrote:
Walter needs to chime in about that. One possibility is to
continue
using tags for marking releases, and then branch for the few
important
releases that we want to patch.
Note that what is described on the wiki distinguish new
version (that
actually bring new stuff) and revision (that contains only
bugfixes).
Does having branches that are not used anymore is a problem ?
They'll
not make the repository much bigger because the data is in
history anyway.
I kinda like the idea that we have tags for releases not
planned for long term support and distinguished branches for
those that we do. Clarifies intent a lot.
Let me propose an updated version of branches w have, according
to what I understand here. Note that I avoid using the term
stable because I'm pretty sure it is a source of confusion and
miscommunication.
master : used as a base for development. New feature are merged
here.
staging : used to provide a view of what the next version will
look like. Regular snapshot of that branch are made so public can
use the last features.
version : used to contain a version that will have a support for
an extended period of time.
If I understand correctly, version is what you call stable : a
branch that is detached to provide long term support.
