Re: names of distribution-branches in the git repository
On 11/23/2010 08:53 AM, Ralf Treinen wrote:
>
> I see that a separate upstream branch is useful in case you are tracking
> different versions of upstream than in sid, but this is not necessarily
> the case. In fact I am using experimental mostly in situations like
> in the current freeze when the upstream version is mostly the same in
> sid as in experimental. And I do not see why I should be forced to
> have seperate upstream branch in cases like this.
>
You can use "experimental/master" and "upstream" branches. But, if you
do that, then other members of the team will have to figure out that
"experimental/upstream" is missing because "experimental/master" is
using the same version as sid's. So, having "experimental/upstream" is
team friendly since it clearly shows what you are doing. And since
branches are really cheap in Git, I don't understand why this bothers
you that much. You'll have to tell gbp that master branch is now
"experimental/master" anyway… So why not doing the same for "upstream"?
Regards,
--
Mehdi Dogguy مهدي الدڤي
http://dogguy.org/
Reply to: