Re: git branch diagram
- From
Jakub Narebski <jnareb@gmail.com>
- Date
- Apr 21, 2008, 13:06 UTC
- Message-ID
- <200804211506.53251.jnareb@gmail.com>
- In-Reply-To
- <1c5969370804210548q4b6aa30h8a8c0323b3fc51d4@mail.gmail.com>
On Monday, 21 April 2008, Matt Graham wrote:
Show 14 quoted lines
> On Sun, Apr 20, 2008 at 8:30 PM, Jakub Narebski <jnareb@gmail.com> wrote: >> <Patrick.Higgins@cexp.com> writes: >> >>> In my diagram, I am assuming that most developers work in master, >>> and make branches for their own long-lived projects and experimental >>> things. >> >> For example git itself, as a project, uses three long-lived branches: >> 'maint', 'master' and 'next', uses 'pu' (proposed updates) branch as >> propagation / review mechanism for short-lived tipic branches. > > Jakub, could you explain the difference between maint and master? And > the difference between master and next? Maint and next are clear, but > how does master relate to those 2?
The posts titled "A note from the maintainer", posted around major git release, should explain it. You can find them also at: http://git.or.cz/gitwiki/MaintNotes http://repo.or.cz/w/git.git?a=blob_plain;f=MaintNotes;hb=todo
In short, the minor releases like 1.5.3.8 are cut out of 'maint' branch, the major releases like latest 1.5.5 are cut out of 'master' branch, and 'next' is where major part of development happens.
-- Jakub Narebski Poland