From: Adam B. <ada...@gm...> - 2021-01-17 11:05:54
|
I’d agree with ensuring “main” is a branch that always builds, and following the updated naming convention, as you suggest. Adam > 在 2021年1月17日,下午7:02,Jeff Allen <ja...@fa...> 写道: > > If we were to follow CPython practice, as we try to, we would create a 2.7 maintenance branch on GitHub and continue development of new features on "master". Actually, we would have done that some time ago. > > I propose to do something slightly different as there are some complications: > > 1. This is a major version change, which is a special case. (What I > described is for when the minor version changes.) > 2. The 3.x code base starts "functionally empty", by which I mean > Jython 2 code is present but not compiled. This may be confusing for > anyone landing on the repo. > 3. There is a fashion now to call the default branch "main" rather than > "master" and renaming has been facilitated at GitHub > (https://github.com/github/renaming). > > The slightly different thing I propose is: > > 1. Create a branch called "main" at a point a little after 2.7.2 (and > after recovery from the history corruption Jim spotted). This is the > developement branch, but you have to select it specifically. > 2. After a delay, rename "master" to 2.7. (Branch "master" on your > local repo still points to this. PRs against "master" at that point > re-target to "2.7" and it is still the default. See link.) > 3. Once Jython 3 on "main" looks credible as an alpha, make "main" the > default branch. > > I'm saying this here in case anyone has a reason why it's terrible idea. > > Jeff > > -- > Jeff Allen > > > > _______________________________________________ > Jython-dev mailing list > Jyt...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jython-dev |