On Thu, 2011-05-05 at 13:49 -0700, Robert Bradshaw wrote:
> Surely other projects have dealt with this.
We have for instance adopted a very strict set of policies on that:
1) Never branch of anything except for master or x.y.z-stable branches
2) Never rebase master or x.y.z-stable branches, unle
On 05/06/2011 09:24 AM, Vitja Makarov wrote:
2011/5/6 Dag Sverre Seljebotn:
On 05/06/2011 08:20 AM, Vitja Makarov wrote:
2011/5/6 Robert Bradshaw:
I don't like the default to be "don't pull from me"--I'd rather there
be some convention to indicate a branch is being used as a queue.
Maybe eve
2011/5/6 Dag Sverre Seljebotn :
> On 05/06/2011 08:20 AM, Vitja Makarov wrote:
>>
>> 2011/5/6 Robert Bradshaw:
>>>
>>> I don't like the default to be "don't pull from me"--I'd rather there
>>> be some convention to indicate a branch is being used as a queue.
>>> Maybe even foo-queue, or a leading u
On 05/06/2011 09:14 AM, Dag Sverre Seljebotn wrote:
On 05/05/2011 11:07 PM, Robert Bradshaw wrote:
I don't like the default to be "don't pull from me"--I'd rather there
be some convention to indicate a branch is being used as a queue.
Maybe even foo-queue, or a leading underscore if people like
On 05/05/2011 11:07 PM, Robert Bradshaw wrote:
I don't like the default to be "don't pull from me"--I'd rather there
be some convention to indicate a branch is being used as a queue.
Maybe even foo-queue, or a leading underscore if people like that.
I've seen leading underscore being used by ot
