Question regarding dist-git aesthetics with branches

[Toshio Kuratomi]

On Mon, Jul 19, 2010 at 03:09:50PM -0700, Jesse Keating wrote:
> 
> Seriously?  Nobody has an opinion here?  Or will this just be another
> case of "ZOMG WHY DID YOU DO THIS STUPID THING" as soon as it rolls out...
> 
I'm not around enough right now to be able to test anything :-(.

I also don't really understand the choices you're presenting since they're
based on git conventions that I don't know.  master is just a convention in
git?  HEAD is treated specially but doesn't exist normally in a repository?

I think the only way to do this is to implement one thing and then be
willing to either change that (or let someone else contribute work to change
it) once people use it and tell you "ZOMG WHY [...]".

That said, I don't think I'd use either HEAD or master as the branch name
since they both have some sort of association with how git itself works
unless the name actually matches 100% with the concept that you're trying to
express here.  When you make a UI choice where a feature has the same name
as another feature but they are onlt 80% compatible you cause problems for
the people that try to do something in that 20% space.  When they switch
from one feature to the other they run into incompatibilities, googling
will turn up the wrong feature, they will ask on IRC and get answers that
concern the wrong feature, etc.  It's better to have a distinct name for
something that is different.

-Toshio
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/devel/attachments/20100720/ccf9d812/attachment.bin