Description
In terms of naming branches, I would like to keep master as one of the mainlines so I'd propose either:
Production: stable
Development: master
Or as an alternative, we could use the master branch for production and have something like this:
Production: master
Development: development
I think I prefer the latter but I'm open to having a conversation about it.
In either case, issues should be labelled with the appropriate tag so we can differentiate. Once we've written up the merge/rebase procedures for this, we should be able to work on things concurrently without stomping on one another's changes because
@rodlogic - if we can come up with a version of this scheme that works for us both and assign issues to ourselves, then as long as we're able to split up the work so we don't clash too often them I'm willing to set you up as a collaborator and grant you commit access to this project. If you'd prefer to continue working in a fork via pull requests, that's absolutely fine as well.
@edsko - would it make sense to move this project into the haskell-distributed organisation? Github organisations make it easier to manage collaborators and configure access rights, and I'm comfortable opening it up to that wider community (which looks like mostly well-typed folks?) if you think that's appropriate.