Hi, > Sam Ruby wrote : > > Stefan Bodewig : > > > > Ooops, does this mean no more commits before the vote? Sorry, > > my last commit was going on while I received your mail. > > Overall, I would say that in this case the branch caused more > work for all > (and Connor specifically) than it helped.
In my opinion branching for a release really helps, wenn we want to support this release this release with fixes IN ITS BRANCH while we are working on 1.4 and 2.0. Even if we dont want to do this for 1.3 IMHO it is a good test for our future 2.0 devel- opent: Imagine this case: We have a 1.4 (or 1.x) which has to be supported while 2.0 is our main focus on developement. I think we'll all agree that we can't do a hard switch to 2.0 - wich will not be compatible, right!?! > Perhaps next time, the term "freeze" should be more clearly defined. > Depending on the definition, a branch may not be appropriate, > or perhaps > should be done later in the cycle where a freeze really means > a freeze. You do not need to FREEZE developement if you branch a release. Thats another benefit of branching. You have one person (role) responsible for the release. In our case this was Conor - BTW: he did well :-). It is the first Ant (and open source)release I take part in so these are only my 2 cents, but helped on many releases of particulary "big" projects in our company - branching works for us ;-)! Greetings, Chris
