From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Tommi Virtanen Subject: Re: master branch in git Date: Wed, 26 Jan 2011 13:34:28 -0800 Message-ID: <20110126213428.GA18855@dreamer> References: <1296076567.1802.16.camel@dogen> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Received: from mail.hq.newdream.net ([66.33.206.127]:40542 "EHLO mail.hq.newdream.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754082Ab1AZVe1 (ORCPT ); Wed, 26 Jan 2011 16:34:27 -0500 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1296076567.1802.16.camel@dogen> Sender: ceph-devel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: John Leach Cc: "ceph-devel@vger.kernel.org" On Wed, Jan 26, 2011 at 09:16:07PM +0000, John Leach wrote: > what's the master branch used for in the git repository? It's currently > at "v0.24". It's not had 0.24.1 or 0.24.2 merged into it so it doesn't > seem to be stable. > > There is a stable branch but it's not been updated since September. You know, that confused me too when I was starting to look at ceph. The branches that are actively used are "unstable" and "testing". I guess "stable" will get some life, well, once we consider Ceph stable ;) To clear up this issue, I'd suggest we either: 1. start using "master" for what is now called "unstable" (which is the typical git usage elsewhere) 2. remove the branch "master", and update ceph.newdream.net:/git/ceph.git/HEAD to say "ref: refs/heads/unstable" I personally vote for #1, unless somebody can come up with a convincing historical argument.. -- :(){ :|:&};: