On 09/25/2009 12:55 PM, Joseph S. Myers wrote:
Do we believe any future conversion to another version control system (that might have a more structured notion of what is a branch than it simply being a directory used in a certain way) would continue to make the history of such branches readily available? (This is more something to make sure of in the course of such a conversion, that this history is kept, but we might wish to avoid making such a conversion unnecessarily hard.)
git-svn seems to look at deleted branches during the import.
We also have branches/dead/,
Does that have advantages over just deleting them? > and a feature branch may be dead for reasons
other than having been merged into trunk (for example, it may have been replaced by another branch without all changes being merged into trunk).
My inclination would be to delete branches like that as well. I would distinguish between branches that have been replaced by another branch or trunk, which I would delete, and branches that haven't had any development on them in a while, but haven't been merged anywhere either, which I would retain.
Jason
