Getting the jmc7 repo into the jmc repo as a branch.

[Marcus Hirt]

Personally I'd go with branching for major development branches and tagging
for releases. The name for the branch could be either just version, so e.g.
"7" or "8", or jmc plus version, so e.g. "jmc7" or "jmc8". I'm perfectly
fine with either, and have no strong feeling either way.

Please let me know what you think.

Kind regards,
Marcus

On Wed, Oct 14, 2020 at 3:50 PM Guru <guru.hb at oracle.com> wrote:

> Option 1 : Not to pollute the branch name :
> jmc8 (Branch for Major versions + tags for minor)
>    jmc-8.0.0
>    jmc-8.y.z
>   ...
>    jmc-8.z.z
> jmc9 (Branch)
>
> Option 2 : Only Branch name, no tags
> jmc-8.0.0
> jmc-8.0.1
> …
> jmc-8.x.y
>
> Will wait for other’s opinion.
>
> Thanks,
> Guru
> > On 14-Oct-2020, at 6:47 PM, Marcus Hirt <marcus.hirt at datadoghq.com>
> wrote:
> >
> > Hi all,
> >
> > Seems most people would rather have major release versions as branches
> than
> > separate repos. Now, what should the branches be called? Just the major
> > version number? Or jmc followed by the major version number? Something
> > entirely different?
> >
> > Kind regards,
> > Marcus
>
>