From: Michael Witten <mfwitten@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 10 Aug 2010 19:15:47 GMT
Subject: Re: With feature branches, what is ever committed directly to master
Message-ID: <AANLkTik5MdbSFAN83B1D3ZbPmUutQ3ouqqAvYw+qECS1@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTin0VgH8CvnUn_tCJPTkhh7Ce-tYWo52qouoVvRN@mail.gmail.com>

On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 14:02, Bradley Wagner
<bradley.wagner@hannonhill.com> wrote:
> what kind of stuff is ever committed
> directly to "master" or is master
> typically the place where things are
> merged into from other stable/features
> branches?
>
> Is "master" really even unstable at
> that point?
>
> Thanks in advance! I realize this
> question is pretty open-ended.

See here:

  http://git.kernel.org/?p=git/git.git;a=blob_plain;f=MaintNotes;hb=todo

The `master' branch is indeed considered the most stable version of
the software when it comes to the way `git' itself is maintained.