[Development] Updating/changing "default" branch for qtbase repository

[Kevin Funk]

On Monday, 16 September 2019 14:10:51 CEST Lars Knoll wrote:
> On 16 Sep 2019, at 13:26, Albert Astals Cid via Development
> <development at qt-project.org<mailto:development at qt-project.org>> wrote:
 
> El dilluns, 16 de setembre de 2019, a les 13:22:22 CEST, Frederik Gladhorn
> va
 escriure:
> On mandag 16. september 2019 12:22:06 CEST Edward Welbourne wrote:
> Albert Astals Cid (16 September 2019 11:33) wrote:
> If i do
> 
>  git clone ssh://myuser@codereview.qt-project.org/qt/qtbase
> 
> I get branch 5.12
> 
> Given that 5.12 is now on cherry-pick mode (AFAIK) would it make more
> sense to default to branch 5.13?
> 
> We have a history of setting a release branch (stable, I think; perhaps
> LTS) as the default branch in our repositories.  This means that anyone
> who mirrors our repositories gets that as their default branch (unless /
> until they update it).  I don't see this as a good choice: getting dev
> on the branches that have it would make more sense.
> 
> IIUC, the rationale for the present practice is that we want to make it
> easier for folk who send us fixes.  I honestly doubt we'd suffer harm by
> having fixes sent to us on dev a bit more often (and other changes, that
> *do* belong on dev, being sent first to another branch would surely
> happen less often); reviewers can surely help the contributor get it
> onto the right branch, if there's a good reason why dev isn't good
> enough.
> 
> ... now, where have I met this discussion recently ?
> I'm quite sure I have, but can't remember where ...
> 
> I also had a chat about this recently and the Gerrit admins in general
> don't
 really fell like constantly changing the default branch, so I'd be
> much in favor of just moving all default branches to dev.
> 
> Same here, i think dev makes sense too, but didn't want to propose
> something
 so radical myself ^_^
> 
> +1 for having it pointing to dev and never changing it again. It’s also more
> in line with most other git repos out there :)

OT: Out of curiosity: Why was "dev" chosen over "master" as main development 
branch in the first place? What's the benefit? This is also something which 
might confuse new contributors easily, as it's not the Git standard 
nomenclature.

If we ever wanted to change that, then now would be the time.

I'm sure this has been answered else where but I can't find a hint of it.

Regards,
Kevin

 
> Cheers,
> Lars
> 
> 
> Cheers,
>  Albert
> 
> 
> In my opinion we should mostly care about the dev branch, since that's
> where
 all future development needs to happen. Moving changes back into
> older releases can of course be important, but that's not what most people
> should have to worry about.
> 
> Cheers,
> Frederik
> 
> Eddy.
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Development mailing list
> Development at qt-project.org<mailto:Development at qt-project.org>
> https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/development
> 
> 
> --
> Albert Astals Cid |
> albert.astals.cid at kdab.com<mailto:albert.astals.cid at kdab.com> | Senior
> Software Engineer
 Klarälvdalens Datakonsult AB, a KDAB Group company
> Tel: Sweden (HQ) +46-563-540090, USA +1-866-777-KDAB(5322)
> KDAB - The Qt, C++ and OpenGL Experts
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Development mailing list
> Development at qt-project.org<mailto:Development at qt-project.org>
> https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/development
> 


-- 
Kevin Funk | kevin.funk at kdab.com | Senior Software Engineer
KDAB (Deutschland) GmbH, a KDAB Group company
Tel: +49-30-521325470
KDAB - The Qt, C++ and OpenGL Experts
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/pkcs7-signature
Size: 5322 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.qt-project.org/pipermail/development/attachments/20190917/55676e0f/attachment.bin>