Branches for development

[Jean Christophe Beyler]

I believe that when you clone the repo, you are set to be in default by
"default". Therefore committers will have to ensure care and
self-preservation to not be pushing to it.

Using a different name than "default" for the mirror branch would alleviate
that.

But I agree consistency is important so I'll also vote on:

- default: mirror of jdk/jdk
- tsan: main development branch for tsan

Anyone else have an opinion on this?
Jc

On Fri, Mar 15, 2019 at 1:41 PM Man Cao <manc at google.com> wrote:

> I'd vote to be consistent with other projects such as Loom or Valhalla,
> that "default" is the mirror of jdk/jdk.
> Being consistent would at least avoid confusion when contributors from
> other projects participate in the tsan project. And there might be a
> technical reason that we are unaware of, e.g., using "default" as the
> mirror might ease the merge process somehow.
> Is there a reason why "mirror" as the mirror and "default" as the
> development branch is superior to the other way round?
>
> For "stable" and "unstable", it might be better that we start off with just
> one development branch ("dev" or "tsan" are better names than "unstable",
> IMO), and when there's a need to demonstrate something, we fork a
> "stable-[timestamp]" branch if we feel it's necessary.
> Maintaining two ongoing branches requires extra work for merging and
> porting, which is likely troublesome.
>
> -Man
>


-- 

Thanks,
Jc