Skip to content

Rename develop to main; remove master #280

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Closed
lossyrob opened this issue Mar 11, 2021 · 5 comments
Closed

Rename develop to main; remove master #280

lossyrob opened this issue Mar 11, 2021 · 5 comments
Labels
best practice Issues that should be addressed for compliance with best practices, but that aren't technically bugs

Comments

@lossyrob
Copy link
Member

The PySTAC release route through branches should got develop -> master -> release branch -> tag. As seen in #279, the merge into master often gets skipped because it's not utilized nor valuable IMO.

I suggest renaming develop to main, and removing master, so that the new release route would go:

  • PRs go into main
  • Release merge main into the release branch
  • Release branch is tagged for the final release.
@lossyrob lossyrob added the best practice Issues that should be addressed for compliance with best practices, but that aren't technically bugs label Mar 11, 2021
@matthewhanson
Copy link
Member

This does seem to be the preferred way I see repos moving to. I've gotten so used to the whole develop branch, then master as the last release, but have come to realize as you said, it doesn't seem to offer much benefit, since releases are tagged anyway.

What is the purpose of the release branch though over just tagging main? It looks like there is a branch for each minor release, is that to make backports easier?

@lossyrob
Copy link
Member Author

Exactly, in especially since PySTAC is tied to producing specific STAC versions, if there's a fix we want to backport to an earlier release to make it work with users who are producing an earlier version of STAC, backporting becomes more straightforward.

@lossyrob
Copy link
Member Author

Note: We are doing this now. If something is broken because of this change, please let us know!

@duckontheweb
Copy link
Contributor

@lossyrob Looks like the CI didn't catch up to the branch name change, I can fix that in a PR.

@lossyrob
Copy link
Member Author

Ah, yep that would be good!

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
best practice Issues that should be addressed for compliance with best practices, but that aren't technically bugs
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants