Delete redundant branches?

Discussion:

Remko Popma

2014-09-23 13:43:22 UTC

I deleted the topic branch for LOG4J2-431 because it has been merged into master so we don't need the bookmark any more.

I gather that it is a common workflow to delete topic branches like this after the work is done and they're merged into master. Shall we adopt that workflow also?

LOG4J2-577 and LOG4J2-809 are also closed in Jira. Does that mean that the topic branches for these issues can be deleted?

Sent from my iPhone

Matt Sicker

2014-09-23 15:36:25 UTC

Permalink

I agree on pruning old branches (especially once they're merged). I'll have
to look at 809 because I think I made that one. Not sure on the other one,
but that one might predate our git repo.

Post by Remko Popma
I deleted the topic branch for LOG4J2-431 because it has been merged into
master so we don't need the bookmark any more.
I gather that it is a common workflow to delete topic branches like this
after the work is done and they're merged into master. Shall we adopt that
workflow also?
LOG4J2-577 and LOG4J2-809 are also closed in Jira. Does that mean that the
topic branches for these issues can be deleted?
Sent from my iPhone
---------------------------------------------------------------------

--
Matt Sicker <***@gmail.com>

Gary Gregory

2014-09-23 15:41:58 UTC

Permalink

Does that mean that code is 100% gone (after GC'd) because it is not
reachable from a Git HEAD?

Gary

Post by Remko Popma
Sent from my iPhone
---------------------------------------------------------------------

--
E-Mail: ***@gmail.com | ***@apache.org
Java Persistence with Hibernate, Second Edition
<http://www.manning.com/bauer3/>
JUnit in Action, Second Edition <http://www.manning.com/tahchiev/>
Spring Batch in Action <http://www.manning.com/templier/>
Blog: http://garygregory.wordpress.com
Home: http://garygregory.com/
Tweet! http://twitter.com/GaryGregory

Matt Sicker

2014-09-23 17:52:34 UTC

Permalink

It doesn't delete history ever unless you jump through hoops to do so.

Post by Gary Gregory

Post by Remko Popma
I deleted the topic branch for LOG4J2-431 because it has been merged into
master so we don't need the bookmark any more.
I gather that it is a common workflow to delete topic branches like this
after the work is done and they're merged into master. Shall we adopt that
workflow also?
LOG4J2-577 and LOG4J2-809 are also closed in Jira. Does that mean that
the topic branches for these issues can be deleted?

Does that mean that code is 100% gone (after GC'd) because it is not
reachable from a Git HEAD?
Gary

Post by Remko Popma
Sent from my iPhone
---------------------------------------------------------------------

--
Java Persistence with Hibernate, Second Edition
<http://www.manning.com/bauer3/>
JUnit in Action, Second Edition <http://www.manning.com/tahchiev/>
Spring Batch in Action <http://www.manning.com/templier/>
Blog: http://garygregory.wordpress.com
Home: http://garygregory.com/
Tweet! http://twitter.com/GaryGregory

--
Matt Sicker <***@gmail.com>

Matt Sicker

2014-09-25 02:59:43 UTC

Permalink

Cleared out a few of those branches (at least the ones that I put up there
in the first place). Still have the new-levels branch (not sure about),
2.0-beta1 (sounds rather outdated), and LOG4J2-609 (still looks to be in
progress).

Post by Matt Sicker
It doesn't delete history ever unless you jump through hoops to do so.

Post by Gary Gregory

Post by Remko Popma
I deleted the topic branch for LOG4J2-431 because it has been merged
into master so we don't need the bookmark any more.
I gather that it is a common workflow to delete topic branches like this
after the work is done and they're merged into master. Shall we adopt that
workflow also?
LOG4J2-577 and LOG4J2-809 are also closed in Jira. Does that mean that
the topic branches for these issues can be deleted?

Does that mean that code is 100% gone (after GC'd) because it is not
reachable from a Git HEAD?
Gary

Post by Remko Popma
Sent from my iPhone
---------------------------------------------------------------------

--
Matt Sicker <***@gmail.com>

Remko Popma

2014-09-29 13:30:33 UTC

Permalink

I deleted branch LOG4J2-589 now that all the commits have been merged into
master.

Other branches that may be candidates for deletion:

* 2.0-beta1 - very old (2 years). Is there anything there worth keeping?
* LOG4J2-577 <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LOG4J2-577> (Refactor
LoggerContext initialization/destruction code) - ticket is closed. Should
we keep the branch?
* LOG4J2-608 <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LOG4J2-608> (Add
support for JUL) - implemented & merged into master. Should be okay to
delete.
* LOG4J2-745 <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LOG4J2-745> (Plugins
can cause ConverterKeys collisions with unpredictable results) - Resolved &
merged into master. Ok to delete?
* LOG4J2-809 <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LOG4J2-809> (Move
caller class reflection utils to API) - Closed & merged into master. Ok to
delete?
* LOG4J2-814 <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LOG4J2-814> (Configuration
file loading should be abstracted into a sort of ResourceLoader interface)
- Closed. Keep the branch?
* experimental - seems abandoned. Matt, is this bookmark worth keeping?
* messaging-module - (LOG4J2-815
<https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LOG4J2-815>?) - seems merged into
master. Matt, okay to delete?

Post by Matt Sicker
Cleared out a few of those branches (at least the ones that I put up there
in the first place). Still have the new-levels branch (not sure about),
2.0-beta1 (sounds rather outdated), and LOG4J2-609 (still looks to be in
progress).

Post by Matt Sicker
It doesn't delete history ever unless you jump through hoops to do so.

Post by Gary Gregory

Post by Remko Popma
I deleted the topic branch for LOG4J2-431 because it has been merged
into master so we don't need the bookmark any more.
I gather that it is a common workflow to delete topic branches like
this after the work is done and they're merged into master. Shall we adopt
that workflow also?
LOG4J2-577 and LOG4J2-809 are also closed in Jira. Does that mean that
the topic branches for these issues can be deleted?

Does that mean that code is 100% gone (after GC'd) because it is not
reachable from a Git HEAD?
Gary

Post by Remko Popma
Sent from my iPhone
---------------------------------------------------------------------

Matt Sicker

2014-09-29 14:12:32 UTC

Permalink

Make sure to run "git fetch --all --prune" to update your refs. I deleted
some of those already.

Post by Remko Popma
I deleted branch LOG4J2-589 now that all the commits have been merged
into master.
* 2.0-beta1 - very old (2 years). Is there anything there worth keeping?
* LOG4J2-577 <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LOG4J2-577> (Refactor
LoggerContext initialization/destruction code) - ticket is closed. Should
we keep the branch?
* LOG4J2-608 <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LOG4J2-608> (Add
support for JUL) - implemented & merged into master. Should be okay to
delete.
* LOG4J2-745 <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LOG4J2-745> (Plugins
can cause ConverterKeys collisions with unpredictable results) - Resolved &
merged into master. Ok to delete?
* LOG4J2-809 <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LOG4J2-809> (Move
caller class reflection utils to API) - Closed & merged into master. Ok to
delete?
* LOG4J2-814 <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LOG4J2-814> (Configuration
file loading should be abstracted into a sort of ResourceLoader interface)
- Closed. Keep the branch?
* experimental - seems abandoned. Matt, is this bookmark worth keeping?
* messaging-module - (LOG4J2-815
<https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LOG4J2-815>?) - seems merged into
master. Matt, okay to delete?

Post by Matt Sicker
Cleared out a few of those branches (at least the ones that I put up
there in the first place). Still have the new-levels branch (not sure
about), 2.0-beta1 (sounds rather outdated), and LOG4J2-609 (still looks to
be in progress).

Post by Matt Sicker
It doesn't delete history ever unless you jump through hoops to do so.

Post by Gary Gregory

Post by Remko Popma
I deleted the topic branch for LOG4J2-431 because it has been merged
into master so we don't need the bookmark any more.
I gather that it is a common workflow to delete topic branches like
this after the work is done and they're merged into master. Shall we adopt
that workflow also?
LOG4J2-577 and LOG4J2-809 are also closed in Jira. Does that mean that
the topic branches for these issues can be deleted?

Does that mean that code is 100% gone (after GC'd) because it is not
reachable from a Git HEAD?
Gary

Post by Remko Popma
Sent from my iPhone
---------------------------------------------------------------------

--
Matt Sicker <***@gmail.com>

Remko Popma

2014-09-29 14:18:11 UTC

Permalink

Oh. Big difference! Thanks!

Post by Matt Sicker
Make sure to run "git fetch --all --prune" to update your refs. I deleted
some of those already.

Post by Matt Sicker
Cleared out a few of those branches (at least the ones that I put up
there in the first place). Still have the new-levels branch (not sure
about), 2.0-beta1 (sounds rather outdated), and LOG4J2-609 (still looks to
be in progress).

Post by Matt Sicker
It doesn't delete history ever unless you jump through hoops to do so.

Post by Gary Gregory

Post by Remko Popma
I deleted the topic branch for LOG4J2-431 because it has been merged
into master so we don't need the bookmark any more.
I gather that it is a common workflow to delete topic branches like
this after the work is done and they're merged into master. Shall we adopt
that workflow also?
LOG4J2-577 and LOG4J2-809 are also closed in Jira. Does that mean
that the topic branches for these issues can be deleted?

Does that mean that code is 100% gone (after GC'd) because it is not
reachable from a Git HEAD?
Gary

Post by Remko Popma
Sent from my iPhone
---------------------------------------------------------------------