#86 rename "master" branch for these docs
Closed: Fixed 3 years ago by bcotton. Opened 3 years ago by mattdm.

That branch isn't the "master" version of anything and it doesn't make any sense (even in the "gold record" analogy). I suggest we use live, prod, or production, because that's what the branch actually is. (You make a change, it's gonna be published!)


In my opinion, we should use whatever git upstream is shifting to as a default, which I think is main. I predict git tooling will get better at non-standard branch names, but I think following upstream's precedent is a good one.

In my opinion, we should use whatever git upstream is shifting to as a default

Agreed in general, but I have a secret, nefarious reason for suggesting prod specifically. It will become not-secret once I figure out if my plan is even possible. :-)

I thought about rawhide for this repo, but in the context of Council docs, I don't think it made sense. I followed GitHub's lead with settling for main.

See Fedora-Council/council-docs#92 and fedora-docs/docs-fp-o#151.

Metadata Update from @jflory7:
- Issue assigned to jflory7

3 years ago

Login to comment on this ticket.

Metadata
Related Pull Requests
  • #93 Merged 3 years ago