You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
I've noticed that Github defaults to the stable/1.6.x branch and it's because the head branch for the repository is stable/1.6.x.
I think most projects I've worked on tend to have master as the HEAD branch. While archivematica doesn't have a master branch, perhaps it should be changed to qa/1.x?
I know when I cloned the repository to write a patch, I accidentally worked off stable/1.6.x rather than qa/1.x (or master) because it was the branch that was created during cloning.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Thanks for the suggestion, @minusdavid. That was a deliberate choice that we prefer to maintain. I think to some extent this has to do with the idea of providing defaults that target production environments.
We're hoping to solve #704 soon so qa/1.x won't include symlinks (this was a problem for you, described in artefactual/deploy-pub#38 and artefactual/deploy-pub#40). You could clone with git clone -b qa/1.x repo_url to have git checking out the desired branch automatically for you.
I've noticed that Github defaults to the stable/1.6.x branch and it's because the head branch for the repository is stable/1.6.x.
I think most projects I've worked on tend to have master as the HEAD branch. While archivematica doesn't have a master branch, perhaps it should be changed to qa/1.x?
I know when I cloned the repository to write a patch, I accidentally worked off stable/1.6.x rather than qa/1.x (or master) because it was the branch that was created during cloning.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: