Stale branches

[aadcg]

@joaotavora I noticed that there are countless stale branches on this repository. Is there a good reason for that? I'd like to delete all of them.

[joaotavora]

Is there good reason for wanting to delete them? :-)

Or is cleanup for cleanup sake the reason in itself, to organize yourself perhaps. But OK, can you list the branches you'd like to delete here?

[aadcg]

I should have framed it in the context of #664 (comment).

When looking for the commit, I've noticed many seemingly "abandoned" branches (some of them are over 10 years). See https://github.com/joaotavora/sly/branches/stale.

For example, see branch master...fix/568-dont-prevent-gc-from-inspector-references. Its only commit landed on master as c2187da. This seems to indicate that you forgot to delete it.

[joaotavora]

Well, SLY is a relatively old project, I started it circa 2013. I don't know, I don't mind the branches and they keep a sense of history. Recently, I used grep to find a really old branch in another project that was still useful. I don't mind renaming the branches to give them some prefix (perhaps for those that don't have one). But I think deleting them altogether and dangle the commits is not a good idea. I know some companies obsessed with deleting old branches, but I never understood the rationale for it, I think it's just sysadmins misunderstanding Git.

[joaotavora]

For example, see branch master...fix/568-dont-prevent-gc-from-inspector-references. Its only commit landed on master as c2187da. This seems to indicate that you forgot to delete it.

I didn't forget. I simply never delete, unless I know it will bring some kind of confusion. It doesn't bother me to have it there. I never git fetch without remote and branch these days, and god forbid I use some of those "convenience" GUI tools :-)

[aadcg]

Interesting take. I disagree but respect your view :)