On Tue, 21 Sep 2010 13:21:53 +0200, Jens Rehsack <rehs...@googlemail.com> wrote:
> > Does that sound ok? > > Partially for me. > > 1) I don't know which svn version is used to store the repository, > so we might run into trouble when merging from the trunk. > 2) We should try to communicate about release cycles anyway, > because it doesn't makes much sense to have the sqlengine > branch ready for release a week after a fresh release is out. > 3) Me might tag something as stable and ready for release, but > want develop more (because we have time, desires or what ever), > so we need to branch (for fixing) ... > > But it sounds like a way we can walk to see where it leads us. > And probably I'm to pessimistic at the moment :) > > Probably we need more branches - depending on the task, let's > see. Tim, would it be OK to release dev versions of `other' branches to CPAN? So the CPANTESTERS can pick up what goes wrong -- H.Merijn Brand http://tux.nl Perl Monger http://amsterdam.pm.org/ using 5.00307 through 5.12 and porting perl5.13.x on HP-UX 10.20, 11.00, 11.11, 11.23, and 11.31, OpenSuSE 10.3, 11.0, and 11.1, AIX 5.2 and 5.3. http://mirrors.develooper.com/hpux/ http://www.test-smoke.org/ http://qa.perl.org http://www.goldmark.org/jeff/stupid-disclaimers/
