Re: stale git branches

[Jonas Hahnfeld]

Am Samstag, den 11.04.2020, 15:33 +0200 schrieb David Kastrup:
> Jonas Hahnfeld <address@hidden> writes:
> 
> > Hi all,
> > 
> > following removal of dev/translation-* branches, I took a closer look
> > at stale branches. I think it would make sense to keep unscoped
> > branches (outside of dev/user/) to a minimum. This should also avoid
> > overlooking old changes that have not been merged yet.
> > The following list is by no means complete, but maybe a good start:
> > 
> > dev/pango contains commits:
> > 53ed2b55e2 Add a RAII wrapper for extracting FT_Face from PangoFcFont
> > c93c477180 Make Pango >= 1.36 mandatory.
> > in master:
> > 9cf8d35e8c Add a RAII wrapper for extracting FT_Face from PangoFcFont
> > 15b7118410 Make Pango >= 1.36 mandatory.
> > I'm fairly certain the branch can be removed.
> 
> git rebase origin origin/dev/pango
> 
> ends up with no commit on top.  So yes.
> 
> > Branches dev/issue3300,
> 
> Mine, but actually issue 3330.  Removed.
> 
> > dev/issue3330, dev/issue3648 are likely related
> > to the named issues which have status 'Verified'. AFAICS there are some
> > additional commits in the branches, could be due to review comments?
> > David, you are probably the best to judge if they are fully merged or
> > some changes could still be relevant, could you take a look?
> > 
> > As far as I understand, master now also has the relevant commits from
> > dev/guile-v2-work, dev/guilev2, and dev/guilev21? Can those branches be
> > dropped to avoid possible confusion about the current status?
> 
> Will followup on all those later.

I just noticed there's another branch 'vector' at the very end of the
list. It has a single commit 'Wip' from 2012...

signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part