Vadim Gritsenko wrote: > > >I think, for cocoon 2.2 with the "real blocks" we need to think about our > >cvs strategy anyway. Currently, we agreed to create a new cvs repository > >for each new major version, so we would have a cocoon-2.2 repository. > > > > Why not 2.1.1? What change *requires* version bump to 2.2?
Good question. I expect that blocks required some changes in the core of cocoon, so the next version with blocks is not only a maintainance release, therefore a major version change. Minor version changes are intended usually only for bug-fixing. > Same repository will be used then, same blocks directories. IIRC, > directory layout for the "fake blocks" was made specifically to enable > "real blocks" without cvs restructuring. Meaning, we can develop "real > blocks" in 2.1 CVS and release as 2.1.1 or 2.1.2 or whatever/whenever it > will be. Ok, I only made the assumption that we will do blocks for 2.2; we haven't spoken about it in detail. If we decide to implement blocks in 2.1.x, it's ok for me. Whatever we choose we have to get to consensus very soon now. Carsten
