On Dec 20, 2006, at 2:01 PM, Rahul Akolkar wrote:
On 12/19/06, Craig McClanahan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I would have a mild preference for naming the branch SHALE_1_0 but
I'm not
going to choke if we go with what you proposed either. I'm also
presuming
we'll create a tag (SHALE_1_0_4) at the appropriate time.
[...]
As regards to the name of the branch, I prefer 1_0_x over 1_0 since
the former looks like a line of development to me (the latter more
like a branch for a single release). However, this isn't anything I
want to spend time over. You pick.
I think whoever makes the branch gets to pick :-)
Do we really need to create both a tag and a branch for every release
we roll? (If so, I'm ok, btw, but I'd like to hear the explanation.)
For example, if we cut 1.0.4 does that mean we are going to create a
tag called SHALE_1_0_4 and a branch called SHALE_1_0? Or do we wait
till we want to start development on a feature that warrants a 1.1
release to create the SHALE_1_0 branch? Also, is it common practice
to *never* touch a tag once it's created or is it considered "ok" to
apply a patch to a tag if needed? If we should never touch it then I
don't see the justification for svn doing tags the way it does. If
we can touch it then I don't see why we need a branch for a "micro"-
level release. (Branches for "minor" and "major" releases are
understandable.)
A related question touched on in the previous paragraph is this: How
do we decide when to start 1.1 development? It would seem to be
based on a significant feature change not just that we cut a release.
I'm sorry if I'm rehashing things that are already commonplace
everywhere else. I just want to make sure I understand why we are
doing what we are doing. Plus, if the Tiles project comes to
fruition I suspect I'm going to be seeing these issues come up again :-)
Greg
