[dev] Horde 5?

[Michael M Slusarz]

Quoting Michael J Rubinsky <mrubinsk at horde.org>:

> Quoting Vilius ?umskas <vilius at lnk.lt>:
>
>> Sveiki,
>>
>> Tuesday, February 28, 2012, 4:54:33 PM, you wrote:
>>
>>
>>> Quoting Michael M Slusarz <slusarz at horde.org>:
>>
>>>> So I can wait for git reorganization, under the condition that we
>>>> need to fix branch naming/organization.  Horde 5 needs to be split
>>>> to a topic branch immediately before releasing the initial version,
>>>> and we need to use master for bleeding-edge development going forward.
>>
>>> I'm confused as to why it matters what we call the branch we do
>>> bleeding-edge development in? "master" is just a name, as is "develop"
>>> for that matter. There is nothing magical about the "master" branch.
>>> What am I missing?
>>
>> I  think  Michael  M means that master by default points to HEAD.
>> You  can  change  master  to  point to whatever you want though.
>
> That's exactly my point though, there is nothing that says that  
> "master" has to be special in anyway.

Master *is* special: When someone clones a git repo, the first branch  
they encounter is master.  Having the initial checkout be anything  
other than bleeding-edge is counter-intuitive and not how any RCS I  
know works.

Especially since our practice in the past has been to tell people they  
need to grab Git (CVS) to get features not currently available in the  
stable code.  We essentially give three options:

* Stable code (packaged files)
* Stable code plus fixes (snapshots)
* Development code (git/cvs)

michael

___________________________________
Michael Slusarz [slusarz at horde.org]