You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@plc4x.apache.org by Christofer Dutz <ch...@c-ware.de> on 2020/06/15 14:08:42 UTC
[DISCUSS] rename our "master" branch
Hi all,
I would like to take the opportunity to discuss with you, if we should perhaps change the name of our “master” branch.
I do know that currently the discussion is mainly based on the fact that for some people “master” seems to imply “slave” and this sort of maps to other cultural issues that might come up in conjunction with this. My suggestion actually doesn’t have anything to do with this reasoning, even if the thought was indeed sparked by this discussion. And if in the end it makes more people happy, that’s an even bigger benefit.
The main reason is that I am working on a lot of project and every project sort of handles branch names differently. Some develop on “master” and release in release branches, some develop on “develop” and release to master etc.
I really like developing on “develop” … the name of the branch sort of set’s what it’s used for … same with release and feature branches … however “master” sort of always droped out of this pattern.
So I would like to suggest we rename “master” to “release(d)” … this way every new contributor will automatically know what’s used for what.
What do you think?
Chris
Re: [DISCUSS] rename our "master" branch
Posted by Niklas Merz <ni...@apache.org>.
Hi everyone,
From my perspective renaming "master" like PLC4X uses it to "release"
makes it easier to understand for newcomers. +1 from me.
At first I was kind of confused when I got in touch with PLC4X. Almost
all projects, I know very well, use the branch "master" as the main
development branch. So if you develop on the "develop" branch and do
releases on the "release" branch helps getting over that confusion and
totally makes sense to me.
Actually I may start to like PLC4Xs naming more over the conventional
naming.
Kind regards
Niklas
Am 15.06.20 um 16:58 schrieb Lukas Ott:
> Hi Chris,
>
> yes that is better and more clear - and yes this is exactly what I
> understood from your initial idea - that release always points to the
> highest release.
>
> Lukas
>
> Am Mo., 15. Juni 2020 um 16:38 Uhr schrieb Christofer Dutz <
> christofer.dutz@c-ware.de>:
>
>> Hi Lukas,
>>
>> Well I guess we'd have "rel/x.x" branches for every version we will be
>> providing bugfixes for and have a "released" which will always point to the
>> highest release tag.
>>
>> Perhaps going to "release/x.y" (two digit) for branch names and
>> "release/x.y.z" (three digit) for release tags and "release" as replacement
>> for "master"?
>>
>>
>> Chris
>>
>>
>> Am 15.06.20, 16:16 schrieb "Lukas Ott" <ot...@gmail.com>:
>>
>> +1 for rekeased branch so this branch indicates that this is the
>> current
>> release branch. For specific versions we have the rel/0.7
>>
>> Am Mo., 15. Juni 2020 um 16:08 Uhr schrieb Christofer Dutz <
>> christofer.dutz@c-ware.de>:
>>
>> > Hi all,
>> >
>> > I would like to take the opportunity to discuss with you, if we
>> should
>> > perhaps change the name of our “master” branch.
>> >
>> > I do know that currently the discussion is mainly based on the fact
>> that
>> > for some people “master” seems to imply “slave” and this sort of
>> maps to
>> > other cultural issues that might come up in conjunction with this. My
>> > suggestion actually doesn’t have anything to do with this reasoning,
>> even
>> > if the thought was indeed sparked by this discussion. And if in the
>> end it
>> > makes more people happy, that’s an even bigger benefit.
>> >
>> > The main reason is that I am working on a lot of project and every
>> project
>> > sort of handles branch names differently. Some develop on “master”
>> and
>> > release in release branches, some develop on “develop” and release to
>> > master etc.
>> >
>> > I really like developing on “develop” … the name of the branch sort
>> of
>> > set’s what it’s used for … same with release and feature branches …
>> however
>> > “master” sort of always droped out of this pattern.
>> >
>> > So I would like to suggest we rename “master” to “release(d)” … this
>> way
>> > every new contributor will automatically know what’s used for what.
>> >
>> > What do you think?
>> >
>> > Chris
>> >
>>
>>
>
Re: [DISCUSS] rename our "master" branch
Posted by Lukas Ott <ot...@gmail.com>.
Hi Chris,
yes that is better and more clear - and yes this is exactly what I
understood from your initial idea - that release always points to the
highest release.
Lukas
Am Mo., 15. Juni 2020 um 16:38 Uhr schrieb Christofer Dutz <
christofer.dutz@c-ware.de>:
> Hi Lukas,
>
> Well I guess we'd have "rel/x.x" branches for every version we will be
> providing bugfixes for and have a "released" which will always point to the
> highest release tag.
>
> Perhaps going to "release/x.y" (two digit) for branch names and
> "release/x.y.z" (three digit) for release tags and "release" as replacement
> for "master"?
>
>
> Chris
>
>
> Am 15.06.20, 16:16 schrieb "Lukas Ott" <ot...@gmail.com>:
>
> +1 for rekeased branch so this branch indicates that this is the
> current
> release branch. For specific versions we have the rel/0.7
>
> Am Mo., 15. Juni 2020 um 16:08 Uhr schrieb Christofer Dutz <
> christofer.dutz@c-ware.de>:
>
> > Hi all,
> >
> > I would like to take the opportunity to discuss with you, if we
> should
> > perhaps change the name of our “master” branch.
> >
> > I do know that currently the discussion is mainly based on the fact
> that
> > for some people “master” seems to imply “slave” and this sort of
> maps to
> > other cultural issues that might come up in conjunction with this. My
> > suggestion actually doesn’t have anything to do with this reasoning,
> even
> > if the thought was indeed sparked by this discussion. And if in the
> end it
> > makes more people happy, that’s an even bigger benefit.
> >
> > The main reason is that I am working on a lot of project and every
> project
> > sort of handles branch names differently. Some develop on “master”
> and
> > release in release branches, some develop on “develop” and release to
> > master etc.
> >
> > I really like developing on “develop” … the name of the branch sort
> of
> > set’s what it’s used for … same with release and feature branches …
> however
> > “master” sort of always droped out of this pattern.
> >
> > So I would like to suggest we rename “master” to “release(d)” … this
> way
> > every new contributor will automatically know what’s used for what.
> >
> > What do you think?
> >
> > Chris
> >
>
>
Re: [DISCUSS] rename our "master" branch
Posted by Christofer Dutz <ch...@c-ware.de>.
Hi Lukas,
Well I guess we'd have "rel/x.x" branches for every version we will be providing bugfixes for and have a "released" which will always point to the highest release tag.
Perhaps going to "release/x.y" (two digit) for branch names and "release/x.y.z" (three digit) for release tags and "release" as replacement for "master"?
Chris
Am 15.06.20, 16:16 schrieb "Lukas Ott" <ot...@gmail.com>:
+1 for rekeased branch so this branch indicates that this is the current
release branch. For specific versions we have the rel/0.7
Am Mo., 15. Juni 2020 um 16:08 Uhr schrieb Christofer Dutz <
christofer.dutz@c-ware.de>:
> Hi all,
>
> I would like to take the opportunity to discuss with you, if we should
> perhaps change the name of our “master” branch.
>
> I do know that currently the discussion is mainly based on the fact that
> for some people “master” seems to imply “slave” and this sort of maps to
> other cultural issues that might come up in conjunction with this. My
> suggestion actually doesn’t have anything to do with this reasoning, even
> if the thought was indeed sparked by this discussion. And if in the end it
> makes more people happy, that’s an even bigger benefit.
>
> The main reason is that I am working on a lot of project and every project
> sort of handles branch names differently. Some develop on “master” and
> release in release branches, some develop on “develop” and release to
> master etc.
>
> I really like developing on “develop” … the name of the branch sort of
> set’s what it’s used for … same with release and feature branches … however
> “master” sort of always droped out of this pattern.
>
> So I would like to suggest we rename “master” to “release(d)” … this way
> every new contributor will automatically know what’s used for what.
>
> What do you think?
>
> Chris
>
Re: [DISCUSS] rename our "master" branch
Posted by Lukas Ott <ot...@gmail.com>.
+1 for rekeased branch so this branch indicates that this is the current
release branch. For specific versions we have the rel/0.7
Am Mo., 15. Juni 2020 um 16:08 Uhr schrieb Christofer Dutz <
christofer.dutz@c-ware.de>:
> Hi all,
>
> I would like to take the opportunity to discuss with you, if we should
> perhaps change the name of our “master” branch.
>
> I do know that currently the discussion is mainly based on the fact that
> for some people “master” seems to imply “slave” and this sort of maps to
> other cultural issues that might come up in conjunction with this. My
> suggestion actually doesn’t have anything to do with this reasoning, even
> if the thought was indeed sparked by this discussion. And if in the end it
> makes more people happy, that’s an even bigger benefit.
>
> The main reason is that I am working on a lot of project and every project
> sort of handles branch names differently. Some develop on “master” and
> release in release branches, some develop on “develop” and release to
> master etc.
>
> I really like developing on “develop” … the name of the branch sort of
> set’s what it’s used for … same with release and feature branches … however
> “master” sort of always droped out of this pattern.
>
> So I would like to suggest we rename “master” to “release(d)” … this way
> every new contributor will automatically know what’s used for what.
>
> What do you think?
>
> Chris
>