Retiring master

[fu]

We have two main branches in the Dreamwidth repositories: master and develop.

master was intended to be used but... never really got any love.

So here's what I propose: remove all the instructions in our documentation which mention master, and just have 'develop`.

Since develop is where all work goes, nothing in the dev workflow will officially change. But occasionally we have accidents where master gets merged into developinstead of the other way around, or someone finds themselves on master when they should be on develop instead -- and removing any mention of master from our instructions should prevent that from ever happening again.

As for what will happen to master... we never actually used it, and at this point ingrained habits for develop + all setups old and new assume develop, so I suggest we continue not using master the way we currently do.

Comments

[mark]

+1

I would suggest that we go ahead and just force push master back to an empty readme file that has links to documentation, where to get the real branch, etc. I think that's much cleaner than having someone check out two year old code when they pull the repository.

[stormerider]

I thought that develop was where the code got changed, but master was what got pushed to the site?

[alexbayleaf]

On Growstuff, we use "dev" for developing against and "master" as our production/latest stable branch.

We have had a recent problem where people who have taken git tutorials expect to be using "master" all the time. This leads them to pull from master instead of dev when updating their own development branches, and things get wacky.

This may or may not occur with DW, but I just wanted to put it out there.