Skip to content
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

Removing unused filteringTerms.yaml & json files #167

Closed
wants to merge 2 commits into from

Conversation

jrambla
Copy link
Contributor

@jrambla jrambla commented Oct 8, 2024

This PR is to remove the unused filteringTerms files, according to issues #159 , #93

@mbaudis
Copy link
Member

mbaudis commented Oct 10, 2024

@jrambla @costero-e Just a note: This PR is against main which IMO isn't a problem per se but don't we do some staging at develop & update in bulk?

@costero-e
Copy link
Collaborator

@mbaudis yes, absolutely, if this is not an urgent fix, in which case it can go directly to main, then it should go to develop for later addition to main (when version change is updated). @jrambla, could we merge this into develop and then include it in 2.2.0 milestone for further merging to main?

@costero-e costero-e changed the base branch from main to develop October 11, 2024 07:18
@jrambla
Copy link
Contributor Author

jrambla commented Oct 11, 2024

IMHO, we (should?) have four main branches: main, develop, fixes & cleanup...
I don't know if this is clear in the 'branch management' discussion or indeed my opinion contradicts it. Does it?
I didn't make the PR against clean-up because it seemed to me that these branches are having issues. If not, that would be my preferred place for this PR.
Makes sense?

@mbaudis
Copy link
Member

mbaudis commented Oct 11, 2024

IMHO, we (should?) have four main branches: main, develop, fixes & cleanup...

Well, we should have one to drop things in which have been reviewed and which is always updated from main, and then do minor version updates with some collected changes. Otherwise it becomes a bit messy if you want to track back... But I'm certainly fine with doing "collective merge + version bump" sessions :-)

@jrambla
Copy link
Contributor Author

jrambla commented Oct 11, 2024

In my view: all/most branches should have reviews, all of them should merge into main and all changes should be assigned to a version.
Are we saying the same, @mbaudis ?

@costero-e
Copy link
Collaborator

IMHO, we (should?) have four main branches: main, develop, fixes & cleanup... I don't know if this is clear in the 'branch management' discussion or indeed my opinion contradicts it. Does it? I didn't make the PR against clean-up because it seemed to me that these branches are having issues. If not, that would be my preferred place for this PR. Makes sense?

Hi @jrambla, yes, it makes sense to have these branches with a cleanup branch. Let me update the cleanup branch to make these cleanups mergeable.

@costero-e costero-e changed the base branch from develop to clean-up October 11, 2024 08:57
@costero-e
Copy link
Collaborator

Done, please, @jrambla and @mbaudis, tell me if we are good now to submit the Pull Request. 😄

@mbaudis
Copy link
Member

mbaudis commented Nov 5, 2024

Merging into clean-up.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants