On Mon, Jul 12, 2021 at 10:52 AM Rudolf Schlatte rudi@constantly.at wrote:
In the first email you said that the purpose of that branch was to permit continuation of the 3.3 release series, so maybe call the branch "v3.3"? That way, there can be multiple such branches without resorting to "stable", "oldstable" etc. names.
Hi everyone, I am only an interested onlooker, but anyway I would like to second the motion for a branch named according to the version series. Specifically I'll suggest version-3_3 (I seem to recall Git forbids "." in branch names) with the understanding that every version on that branch will be 3.3.something.
In this picture development continues on a branch named master or main or dev or whatever.
Commits can be cherry picked from the, um, primary development branch to the release branch to backport any changes deemed appropriate.
Any future releases would be on a new branch, presumably version-3_4 or version-4 or whatever; the version-3_3 branch would not be reused for that purpose.
The benefit of such a scheme, I believe, is just to make it clearer what's what.
FWIW
Robert Dodier