Closed davisagli closed 2 years ago
I'm not sure we want to change our workflow actually, it's just that we currently are in a (temporary) situation where we lost sync between those branches, and there's a couple of actions to take before syncing them again.
Simplyfing things for contributors is a good direction though. But I guess, having a "free" master branch to be able to release patches while still delaying features is quite handy.
Ping @SassDoc/owners, and anyone interested... :)
Sorry, I misunderstood your comment then. I can see the value in keeping distinct master and develop branches. But if the develop branch is out of sync then maybe it's best to rename it and make a new develop branch from master?
David Glick (mobile)
On Jun 3, 2017, at 12:00 AM, Pascal Duez notifications@github.com wrote:
I'm not sure we want to change our workflow actually, it's just that we currently are in a (temporary) situation where we lost sync between those branches, and there's a couple of actions to take before syncing them again.
Simplyfing things for contributors is a good direction though. But I guess, having a "free" master branch to be able to release patches while still delaying features is quite handy.
Ping @SassDoc/owners, and anyone interested... :)
— You are receiving this because you authored the thread. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub, or mute the thread.
According to https://github.com/SassDoc/sassdoc/pull/498#issuecomment-305952176 the
develop
branch is outdated. This adjusts the dev instructions to no longer use that branch.