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

[Marcus Hirt]

I did a quick poll in the JMC slack - everyone there wanted "jmc<version>",
e.g. "jmc7", to be the branch naming convention. If you disagree, please
let me know or go to the slack and vote on the poll!

Kind regards,
Marcus

On Wed, Oct 14, 2020 at 4:28 PM Marcus Hirt <marcus.hirt at datadoghq.com>
wrote:

> 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
>>
>>