Re: Marking abandoned branches

Johannes Schindelin wrote:

On Wed, 13 Sep 2006, Petr Baudis wrote:

quoted

Dear diary, on Wed, Sep 13, 2006 at 05:17:59PM CEST, I got a letter
where Jon Smirl [off-list ref] said that...

quoted

Abandoned branches are common in CVS since it is not distributed.
People start working on something in the main repo and then decide it
was a bad idea. In the git world these branches usually don't end up
in the main repo.

Can't you just toss the branch away in that case? :-)

You could also stash the ref to refs/heads-abandoned/ instead of
refs/heads/ if you want to keep the junk around for some reason. Of
course you don't get the nice marker with explanation of why is this
abandoned and who decided that, but you can just use an empty commit for
the same purpose.

... or a tag (remember, you can stash a tag into refs/abandoned/, instead 
of a commit) with the further benefit that you really cannot commit on top 
of that.

Or refs/Attic/ ;-)

-- 
Jakub Narebski
Warsaw, Poland
ShadeHawk on #git