Julien Rioux <jri...@physics.utoronto.ca> writes: | On 13/03/2012 5:58 PM, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote: >> Julien Rioux<jri...@physics.utoronto.ca> writes: >> >> | it should be allowed to have feature branches >> | directly in the main repo. >> >> This is the part that I really disagree with. Plainly: no, you should >> not be allow to create what ever branch you want in the main repo. >> > | Please? I promise I'll behave!
But why? This is the perfect case for a separate repo. > | To be precise I'm not talking about touching any of the sacred, | pristine history branch(es) that Vincent wants. I'm talking about | long-time features on the order of weeks. We can agree on a naming | convention and a purpose for branches so that it is not "what ever | branch I want" but "whatever branches we want". In svn some branches | were allowed and it would seem that git promotes this practice. it svn that was the only way to share your work, not so with git. And it is not what git promotes either. >> This is the repo with the higher goals and that everyone else will see, >> it should not contain interim/changing work. >> > | Assuming that the pristinity of the lyx repo as a whole is so | important that we cannot allow trusted developers to create branches, | then maybe such branches can be allowed in the lyx-staging repo? Can | we have branches in this one, please? That would be better, but I do not understand why you couldn't have this in your own repo. -- Lgb
