On 11/03/2006 12:23 PM, Waldek Hebisch wrote:
Gabriel Dos Reis wrote:
This clarifiers the terminology for me.
Not for me.
Bill seemed to conflict himself when he said that
a)
> In any case, please keep in mind that we had previously agreed that
> all patches to silver would be sent by email to Tim Daly and that
> he would be responsible for review and applying these changes to
> axiom--silver--1. That is the route by which patches are supposed
> to the new svn /silver "trunk".
and
b)
> SVN /trunk was created to be Silver from which the
> experimental branches would be branched.
>
> > > axiom--silver--1 was created to be a pre-gold version of
> > > the system with "early release" of changes so they can be
> > > tested.
>
> No. axiom--silver--1 was created to be a mirror of SVN /trunk
> (now called SVN /silver) so that you would not have to deal
> with the problems of using SVN.
And I have written something on
http://wiki.axiom-developer.org/AxiomSources
which is certainly not up-to-date. Unfortunately I am to confused by
what is master-silver and what are the copies so that I cannot update
this page.
Please, please, don't let the AxiomSources page get out-of-date. With
all this SCM mess nobody is going to understand where to start with.
1) Should any new patch be applied to /trunk ?
If we all agreed to send patches to Tim for review, then I would say no.
Silver should always be the same on axiom--silver--1, SF-/silver
Google/trunk (or is it also Google/silver?).
Ralf
_______________________________________________
Axiom-developer mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/axiom-developer
