Afterwards, maybe current development can be in the branch until ready, ie. feature/multi-channel or develop/0.54, etc?
That's what I would suggest in general.
It would be great if all new features, rewrites, experiments, etc. could be made in feature branches. This has several advantages:
1. When working in a feature branch, you can mess around without worries. In the worst case, you can just roll back and force push. Also, it allows to squash the commits before merging for a nicer commit history (= less intermediate commits)
2. We can merge the develop branch into master any time and make bugfix releases while simulatanouesly working on new features.
3. The master branch would always be stable.
Christof
On 06.02.2023 21:50, Dan Wilcox wrote:
I'm fine with branching master, (hard) resetting back to a previous point, merging/cherry-picking portaudio fixes, tagging 0.53-2, then doing a force push. As long as everyone knows ahead of time, we can do a force pull afterwards. Yes, it's best avoided, but is sometimes be needed.
Afterwards, maybe current development can be in the branch until ready, ie. feature/multi-channel or develop/0.54, etc?
On Feb 6, 2023, at 12:00 PM, pd-dev-request@lists.iem.at wrote:
Message: 2 Date: Mon, 6 Feb 2023 09:44:36 +0100 From: IOhannes m zmoelnig zmoelnig@iem.at To:pd-dev@lists.iem.at Subject: [PD-dev] branch names (was Re: figuring out how to get everything merged) Message-ID: 47a595e9-4e0a-12fb-1432-41803fc6c8a8@iem.at Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; Format="flowed"
On 2/5/23 22:37, Miller Puckette via Pd-dev wrote:
Yep, I originally made a "0.53" branch but then messed it up so badly I had to start over - and thought it better to change the name to avoid confusion.
i see. it seems like the "avoid confusion" did not utterly succeed though ;-)
Dan Wilcox @danomatika http://twitter.com/danomatika danomatika.com http://danomatika.com robotcowboy.com http://robotcowboy.com
Pd-dev mailing list Pd-dev@lists.iem.at https://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-dev