No, the main branch should be at HEAD, and releases ought to be a few commits back, when it was tested and considered stable enough. Maybe that’s the joke, they’re doing it at unstable points.
Main branch is a common choice for the root fork of a git development repository. It was master, but it is a poor choice when respecting freed men from slavery.
In software development the main branch is the version which the clients update to.
Before pushing updates to the main branch, they should be forked to a test branch.
Microsoft is pushing out updates without properly testing them, resulting in a lot of avoidable bugs.
No, the main branch should be at HEAD, and releases ought to be a few commits back, when it was tested and considered stable enough. Maybe that’s the joke, they’re doing it at unstable points.
Main branch is a common choice for the root fork of a git development repository. It was master, but it is a poor choice when respecting freed men from slavery.
Right. I was dumbing it right down without overcomplicating it.