Open angelo-hub opened 6 years ago
@AngefloMusic Yeah I think this makes a lot of sense, and really like the idea of using gitflow. And just so I understand correctly, are you saying that our feature branches would be like "v3.4.0" and any major feature pertaining to 3.4.0 will be a PR under "v3.4.0"? So if we were following this pattern from the start, bulkOps #67 and #63 would be PR's under the "v3.4.0" branch instead of master?
@Pidid Yes exactly my point, I just didn't want to start doing it without a discussion within the maintainers
@AngefloMusic Yeah for sure! Well I'll start following this pattern and I am assuming to make pull requests to "v3.4.0" for any features moving forward. Should we make a contributor guide that details stuff like this merging policy?
Yeah we should, i’ll start writing a contributor guide, and put a PR in for it this week
@AngefloMusic lets also open a slack shouldn't we for contributors etc!!
Before we merge any of these new PRs with our new maintainers and get this project going, I'd like to implement a branching release strategy like gitflow into this project, I'd like to have feature branches for release tags to keep our semversion-ing in place with more maintainers coming on board, and feature build outs.
For example: I think bulkOps #67 and #63 should be held off and included in version release
3.4.0
while some of the patch PRs should be in3.3.1
, and therefor for major and minor semversion's I'd like to point PR's to a release branch, so we can make sure the additional features are well tested together before publshing.@Pidid what do you think?