On Wed, Mar 21, 2012 at 2:17 PM, Diederik van Liere dvanliere@gmail.com wrote:
Hi y'all,
With the pending git migration upon us,is this also the right time to think about naming conventions for git branches or is there nu such a need? I can imagine that a branch aimed at fixing a bug could be named B12345, or something like that. Or are 'descriptive' names good enough? One reason to have naming conventions is that it would make it easier in the future to run scripts to collect stats on particular branches. That would be much harder in a complete freetext environment.
Having a bug number is useful and gives an immediate place to look for information. git-review uses the local branch name as the "Topic" so it's helpful for grouping things relating to a single bug in Gerrit.
For features or other random things that don't have a specific bug, I prefer being nice and descriptive. Something like "config-mgmt-overhaul" or "new-feature-foobar" are clear. Something like "ui-fix" isn't.
I think we should use the same naming conventions like we do for message keys--all lowercase and using hyphens rather than spaces or underscores.
Other than the branch/tag names for core, I don't think we necessarily need strong guidelines here--common sense should suffice for now.
When in doubt: be verbose!
-Chad