[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: GOP-PROP 11: git repositories
From: |
Graham Percival |
Subject: |
Re: GOP-PROP 11: git repositories |
Date: |
Tue, 6 Sep 2011 13:14:20 +0100 |
User-agent: |
Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14) |
On Tue, Sep 06, 2011 at 10:27:25AM +0100, Trevor Daniels wrote:
>
> Graham Percival wrote Monday, September 05, 2011 9:39 PM
> >
> >http://lilypond.org/~graham/gop/gop_11.html
>
> I'm happy with this proposal, but the origin/dev branches
> are not mentioned explicitly. Presumably they remain
> unchanged?
Yes, since those are "logical" branches -- at some point in time
the code in dev/* was "split away" from the code in master.
By contrast, the branches I think we should move to a different
repository were never "split away" from master.
Unchanged are:
master
release/unstable
lilypond/translation
stable/*
dev/*
cvs/master
tarball/master
the last two aren't particularly relevant these days, but they
don't do any harm.
Cheers,
- Graham
- GOP-PROP 11: git repositories, Graham Percival, 2011/09/05
- Re: GOP-PROP 11: git repositories, Janek WarchoĊ, 2011/09/05
- Re: GOP-PROP 11: git repositories, Trevor Daniels, 2011/09/06
- RE: GOP-PROP 11: git repositories, Phil Holmes, 2011/09/06
- Re: GOP-PROP 11: git repositories, Graham Percival, 2011/09/06
- RE: GOP-PROP 11: git repositories, Phil Holmes, 2011/09/06
- Re: GOP-PROP 11: git repositories, Graham Percival, 2011/09/06
- RE: GOP-PROP 11: git repositories, Phil Holmes, 2011/09/06
- Re: GOP-PROP 11: git repositories, Graham Percival, 2011/09/06