+1 to avoiding clutter by not using feature branches on the Geode repo. Sharing your own repo, as Kirk suggests, also works better when collaborating with folks who aren't committers.
On Tue, Jun 2, 2020 at 4:16 PM Kirk Lund <kl...@apache.org> wrote: > I prefer to share a fork among multiple developers instead of using the > Apache Geode repository. > > On Tue, Jun 2, 2020 at 3:42 PM Jacob Barrett <jbarr...@pivotal.io> wrote: > > > I know this has been brought up multiple times without resolution. I want > > us resolve to ban the use of Geode repository for work in progress, > feature > > branches, or any other branches that are not release or support branches. > > There is no reason given the nature of GitHub why you can’t fork the > > repository to contribute. > > > > * Work done on these branches results in the ASF bots updating the > > associated JIRAs and email blasting all of us with your work. > > > > * People don’t clean up these branches, which leads to a mess of branches > > on everyones clones and in the UI. > > > > * All your intermediate commits get synced to the repo, which bloats the > > repo for everyone else. Even your commits you rebase over and force push > > are left in the repo. When you delete your branch these commits are not > > removed. There is no way for us to prune unreferenced commits. Nobody > else > > needs your commits outside of what was merged to a production branch. > > > > If anyone has a use case for working directly from Geode repo that can’t > > work from a fork please post it here so we can resolve. > > > > Thanks, > > Jake > > > > > > > > >
