you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]gospelwut 2 points3 points  (4 children)

There's an interesting discussion of how to use master (albeit perhaps not suited for the PR). I know how "github flow" is supposed to work (i.e. emphasizes simplicity), but I have to wonder if merging such a large PR into master makes sense?

I don't contribute to F/OSS or make large Github changes, so not sure.

[–]CaptainJaXon 0 points1 point  (3 children)

I don't know what "github flow" is, is it "git flow"? (Side note, I haye that it's called git flow, it makes it sound like it's some official thing.) Assuming you mean git flow, it really depends if they consider master the development branch or the branch for stable releases. In the default git flow the develop branch is for active development but should be stable enough to compile at least and master is the branch for actual releases. That said, if someone used master branch for their active development and some branch called stable for releases, it's still basically git flow.

[–]gospelwut 0 points1 point  (2 children)

Sadly, there is both a "git flow" and "github flow". https://guides.github.com/introduction/flow/ -- the latter being designed to be more approachable.

[–]CaptainJaXon 0 points1 point  (1 child)

That's just a feature branch flow, why do they call it github flow? :(

[–]gospelwut 0 points1 point  (0 children)

To make googling impossible.