Do we need a `develop` branch?

Factlink / pavlov

Provides a Command/Query/Interactor framework.

MIT License

22 stars 4 forks source link

Do we need a `develop` branch? #10

Closed marten closed 11 years ago

marten commented 11 years ago

Most gems I know don't do this, and I'll often open up the Github page for a gem to see if it's still under active development. I would probably simply assume that Pavlov has been dead for 5 months, and not look at potential other branches.

I understand this is an artefact of using git-flow, but maybe this is an unforeseen consequence.

jjoos commented 11 years ago

no opinion about this, I wouldn't mind deleting it and just working with pull requests.

markijbema commented 11 years ago

In favor.

jjoos commented 11 years ago

Ok I'll delete this, when [redacted] is compatible with develop.

markijbema commented 11 years ago

Isn't [redacted] on a specific commit? Then it wouldn't really matter right? Or we could tag the current master as a certain version?

marten commented 11 years ago

Wouldn't [redacted] be either locked (by Gemfile.lock) to a specific gem version, or locked to a specific SHA1? Either way, as long as you don't bundle update pavlov they should be fine, right?

jjoos commented 11 years ago

You're completely right, no problem here. It was just something I was working on, btw [redacted] is compatible with develop without any modifications.