NP, I could have been more clear.
I guess I see it this way... this is a Work-In-Progress (wip). As such it
has certain implications. In fact I really liked this branch naming
convention (borrowed from Vlad) for just this reason.
On Tue, Nov 27, 2018 at 8:03 AM Davide D'Alto <davide(a)hibernate.org> wrote:
> Well first, I never said it would be deleted after the Alpha. I
said it
would be deleted *at some point*, meaning at some point after 6 is moved to
master.
Sorry, my bad
On Tue, Nov 27, 2018 at 1:34 PM Steve Ebersole <steve(a)hibernate.org>
wrote:
>
> On Tue, Nov 27, 2018 at 7:22 AM Davide D'Alto <davide(a)hibernate.org>
wrote:
>>
>> +1 for the creation of the branch upstream and everything Yoann said.
>>
>> One curiosity, once there is an alpha, why would you delete the whole
branch?
>> Couldn't you change everything on the existing branch without deleting
it?
>> It's unusual to rewrite the history of upstream branches but we have
>> done it before.
>
>
> Well first, I never said it would be deleted after the Alpha. I said it
would be deleted *at some point*, meaning at some point after 6 is moved to
master.
>
> Also, IMO, topic branches upstream are generally speaking a very bad
idea. So this is something we hardly ever do - maybe y'all do on other
projects, dunno. But either way, it is very common for a topic branch to
go away eventually.
>
> As far as re-writing history, sure it is unusual but we are already in
the realm of unusual merely by having a topic branch upstream
>