Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Make version_0_2 the default branch and rename master to version_0_3 #248

Open
widdowquinn opened this issue Apr 14, 2021 · 5 comments
Open
Assignees
Labels
documentation documentation is unclear or incomplete VERSION_2 issues relating to version 0.2.x of pyani
Milestone

Comments

@widdowquinn
Copy link
Owner

Many users who install pyani v0.2.x through conda or PyPI come to GitHub for documentation, and find the default branch master, which refers to v0.3+. The CLIs are different, and this causes confusion (see #240 #238 #226 #192 #176 #171 #169 #165 etc.)

By making version_0_2 the default, we present the stable version of pyani, and the documentation that those users expect.

Renaming master to version_0_3 has a number of desirable effects, including being explicit and transparent about the purpose of the branch, and setting a precedent for branch naming when developing future versions.

When v0.3.0 becomes the stable version, we can make the version_0_3 branch the default for the repo.

@widdowquinn widdowquinn added documentation documentation is unclear or incomplete VERSION_2 issues relating to version 0.2.x of pyani labels Apr 14, 2021
@widdowquinn widdowquinn added this to the 0.3.0 milestone Apr 14, 2021
@widdowquinn widdowquinn self-assigned this Apr 14, 2021
@baileythegreen
Copy link
Contributor

Perhaps the branch name should include 'dev' in it? I know this then means the branch name might have to be effectively changed later, but it may pre-empt some additional misunderstandings about the state of the branch code.

@widdowquinn
Copy link
Owner Author

I would always consider that the master branch on GitHub is the development target (even though development is carrying on with other branches). Releases/stable versions etc. get marked with tags along that branch, rather than being maintained as separate branches.

The version_0_2 branch is only really being maintained in parallel because of my slowness in getting v0.3+ out of the door, and the need to make fixes that wouldn't have shown up in the much-modified v0.3+ codebase.

The main issue here is users being confused by the documentation. We can solve that just by making version_0_2 the default on GitHub. The more I think about this, the more I think pinning the name of master to a specific version is a bad idea.

@widdowquinn
Copy link
Owner Author

Reading the documentation on GitHub, it looks like it doesn't matter whether I think it's a bad idea - it's the route we'll have to take.

I think that the benefits of transparent documentation for users outweigh my concerns.

I think we should try to:

  1. tidy the branches on GitHub (and locally - I've probably got a few hanging around) that still need to resolve to master
  2. switch the default on GitHub to version_0_2
  3. rename master to version_0_3
  4. update README.md documentation to reflect the change

Am I missing anything? What do you think?

@baileythegreen
Copy link
Contributor

That last comment got buried in notifications....

I don't see a great number of branches (some active ones—mostly mine—and a few stale ones). Which would you be trying to eliminate?

If we do # 2 and # 3 in that order, they are easy to do.

I guess the only other thing would be the not you left in #250, about the config file needed to make @allcontributors work.

@widdowquinn
Copy link
Owner Author

I don't see a great number of branches (some active ones—mostly mine—and a few stale ones). Which would you be trying to eliminate?

There aren't many (I deleted a handful after writing that comment). I haven't decided what to do with the others.

I guess the only other thing would be the not you left in #250, about the config file needed to make @allcontributors work.

Unless there's something I've forgotten… there usually is.

Repository owner deleted a comment from allcontributors bot Apr 21, 2021
Repository owner deleted a comment from allcontributors bot Apr 21, 2021
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
documentation documentation is unclear or incomplete VERSION_2 issues relating to version 0.2.x of pyani
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants