Versioning of Frameworks

[Christian Mollekopf]

On Tue, May 12, 2015, at 09:22 AM, David Faure wrote:
> On Monday 11 May 2015 15:51:20 Christian Mollekopf wrote:
> > I think there are two possibilities:
> > * "master" is the development branch and we have a separate "release"
> > branch
> > => contributors have it easier because that is perhaps more common,
> > and the people releasing need to know that they shouldn't release off
> > "master" but off "release"
> > * "master" is the release branch and we have a separate development
> > branch
> 
> Neither of those is how development works in Frameworks.
> 
> "master" is the development branch *and* the release branch.
> 
> Most of the work on any library can be split into small enough chunks
> that can 
> be committed incrementally, each change being stable and tested.
> Only very large refactorings (e.g. changing the underlying technology)
> might 
> sometimes require a work branch, but that is really the exception,
> smaller 
> refactorings can also be done incrementally.
> 
> You're joining an existing project with existing rules. I made a
> compromise 
> already on the versioning, can you make a compromise on the git workflow?
> 

Yes. If the release scripts only release if the version has changed, as
discussed,
then I'm happy to use that workflow.

Cheers,
Christian