Re: scratch/igc as a feature branch [was: Re: igc: trying to chase a crash]

[Stefan Kangas]

Gerd Möllmann <gerd.moellmann@gmail.com> writes:

> Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> writes:
>
>>> From: Andrea Corallo <acorallo@gnu.org>
>>> Cc: gerd.moellmann@gmail.com,  yandros@gmail.com,  ofv@wanadoo.es,
>>>   emacs-devel@gnu.org,  pipcet@protonmail.com
>>> Date: Thu, 28 Nov 2024 05:56:29 -0500
>>>
>>> Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> writes:
>>>
>>> > The question is indeed what kind of trouble this could cause.  If it
>>> > loses the history, I wouldn't do it, since the fact that it's under
>>> > scratch/ is not a catastrophe, IMO.
>>>
>>> Sure, my idea would be to just push the current head of scratch/icg to
>>> feature/igc (and remove the first), so no history would be lost.
>>
>> If that works (I never did anything like that, so don't know what Git
>> does), then I don't mind.
>
> One can also rename branches, BTW.
>
>>
>> If we do this, it would be good to post a message here telling people
>> how to switch to the renamed branch, even if that is trivial.
>
> Shouldn't we wait for Pip to say something?

Ping!  Pip, what do you think of renaming the scratch/igc branch to
feature/igc?  We would keep the branch exactly as it is now, but just
rename it (morally equivalent to "git branch -m feature/igc").

>From a technical/procedural perspective, the main difference is that
force pushes are no longer allowed (though we don't do them in practice
already).

>From a social perspective, it's also more "official sounding" than a
scratch branch.  This means that I get to say things like "the IGC
branch is now officially a feature branch, which means that we're quite
serious about it, so can you please invest your precious time and
resources into helping us test it?".  :-)

I believe that a rename could be done with a small amount of friction.
You'd need to update which branch you track locally and so on, but we
could document how to do that: it comes out to a few git commands.

If we agree that it makes sense, I think we should move forward with
this.  Thanks.