Hi Jean,
Le 13 mars 2023 à 12:33, Privat, Jean <privat.jean@uqam.ca> a écrit :
what would be the rational behind having a main branch as default instead a branch with the version we are working on?
As with most naming issues in CS, this does not change a lot in the grand order of things. However, I believe that using a standard nomenclature could help newcomers and casual developers.
I could consider start having branchs named, e.g. pharo12-dev, to differentiate it from the stable branch, but since that would mean to change a lot of tools that depend on the naming, it has to be considered careful
pharo12-dev is great. but since there is only main dev branch, maybe the `pharo12-` part is not that useful. but since it's a git repository, maybe use a conventional name for "the main development branch" that is master or main.
In git, master / main branch does not mean it is the main or current development branch. It is just the default branch name of a new repository. It could be used as a development branch as well as an integration branch (e.g. gitflow). I would not use main for the current dev branch but rather pharoxx or pharoxx-dev. Christophe