-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 3
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
More elaborate workflow? #60
Comments
Yes, I think a dev branch with named releases on master would probably be a good idea. The most important things is that we need to get tests for all functions against the neuprint server. There are still a few breakages for things that people have apparently not been using. Looking at https://codecov.io/gh/natverse/neuprintr/tree/master/R could help. |
I am on board with this |
it would be really helpful to have more examples somehow of analysis code that could break because I still see some things that I would like to change that will cause breakage. Example
|
I propose that we release a new version in the next 24h. Then after that release we switch to a more conservative workflow with a dev branch. Ideally we would switch the default branch but I do not recall if master will continue to be the default for installations via the |
I have now protected the master branch by default so that the travis build must pass before merges are allowed. |
@jefferis @alexanderbates I was wondering, given the rate of change on that repo and the fact that people are already using it to analyze data, if we should think about some more elaborate workflow? Maybe push the day to day on a dev branch (meaning merge PR into dev instead of master), and only push things to master once they're stable -- together with documentation of the possible necessary changes in existing analysis code. Thoughts?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: