I’m fine with moving all development work to master given the use case for geode-examples—I just don’t want PR’s merged to *both* master and develop.
Other thoughts? Anthony > On Dec 12, 2018, at 9:16 AM, Dan Smith <dsm...@pivotal.io> wrote: > > Good question! I think we intentionally left the default branch as master > so that users cloning the examples from github will get examples that work > against a released version of geode. > > That said, I don't feel too strongly if we would rather make things more > consistent with the geode repo - it seems like we also try to keep develop > stable. > > -Dan > > On Wed, Dec 12, 2018 at 9:07 AM Anthony Baker <aba...@pivotal.io> wrote: > >> Alexander noticed that some recent PR’s against the geode-examples repo >> made against the master branch. That breaks the gitflow approach where >> only released code is on master. Should we update the default branch to be >> develop? >> >> >> Anthony >> >>
