On 18 Dec 2018, at 14:23, Ben Coman <btc@openinworld.com> wrote:
On Tue, 18 Dec 2018 at 21:01, Esteban Maringolo <emaringolo@gmail.com> wrote: El mar., 18 dic. 2018 a las 9:53, Sven Van Caekenberghe (<sven@stfx.eu>) escribió:
So let us agree on the best name then, to minimise confusion going forward.
I am not sure I would go for camel case, git is typically lowercase (or so it feels), I agree 'release' should be part of the name, so
last-release latest-release lastRelease latestRelease
Following "gittish" conventions, IMO `latest-release` would be the proper name because "last" suggests me there won't be more releases afterwards.
Good point. +1.
But I wonder if moving tags is really a good idea. I've not practical experience with it but reading section "If the tag is edited on the server, but the local one is old" http://blog.iqandreas.com/git/how-to-move-tags/ it seems potentially complicated.
Whereas if latest-release was a branch, after you version tag your release you could do... $ git checkout latest-release $ git merge tagversion $ git push
And side benefit, latest-release would show up in the github > Insights > Network view to easily inspect what changes have been made since latest-release.
cheers -ben
interesting. since both a branch and a moving tag look the same from the reference standpoint, this could be considered an implementation detail, the repo maintainer could switch later on, while the URL would remain github://svenvc/ztimestamp:latest-release