Re: [eigen] Named branches

[Hauke Heibel <hauke.heibel@xxxxxxxxx>]

It's ok. After thinking about it again, I agree that it would be a bit too confusing. It's easy enough to create a fork.

Regards,

Hauke

On Tue, May 7, 2013 at 2:38 PM, Gael Guennebaud <gael.guennebaud@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

I'm also temped to favor forks to keep the main repository as simple
as possible.

gael

On Tue, May 7, 2013 at 1:30 PM, Christoph Hertzberg
<chtz@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On 07.05.2013 11:07, Hauke Heibel wrote:
>>
>> does anybody over here have objections against using named branches for
>> providing patches and new features (bitbucket supports named branches +
>> pull requests).
>
>
> Will this still give unauthorized users the possibility to create branches?
> (ok, obviously forks would not be forbidden then, I guess)
> Furthermore, I prefer very experimental features (which are abandoned quite
> often) not to pollute the commit history of the main repository.
>
> That said, I don't have strong objections, but I prefer the way it is at the
> moment.
>
> Christoph
>
> --
> ----------------------------------------------
> Dipl.-Inf., Dipl.-Math. Christoph Hertzberg
> Cartesium 0.049
> Universität Bremen
> Enrique-Schmidt-Straße 5
> 28359 Bremen
>
> Tel: +49 (421) 218-64252
> ----------------------------------------------
>
>