> I'm not sure what you mean...merging active dev branch into an > svn/tag?
I do this all the time is all I can offer in response. > To pull this off in git, you'd have to create a branch for > the merge, no? I did it yesterday before I claimed it was possible. It creates a local anonymous branch from that you could subsequently tag and push into some branch. My use case in particular was porting in patches/security fixes from master into maint branches, but the approach is generalizable. > how does this avoid the code freeze? Master never changed. > http://nvie.com/posts/a-successful-git-branching-model/ I'd be a +1. -1 The proposal as stands is for a single active development branch called master with maintenance branches as needed for important fixes. The big projects I cited previously confirm this is both standard practice in the git world and gives me confidence to claim it will be sufficient for our needs. That said we can always change in the future as need arises -- I hope we can all agree git allows a great deal of flexibility to accommodate various development workflows. > * cas-3_4_x_maintenance -> master (tip of active > development/integration/release branch) > * cas-3_4_x_maintenance -> 3.4.x (maintenance branch if need for a > point or security release) > * cas-3_3_x_maintenance -> 3.3.x (maintenance branch if need for a > point or security release) +1 > * rfe-lppe (feature branch) > * rfe-cas4api (big feature branch :) I absolutely hate abbreviations for this kind of thing -- we do have an international audience where acronyms may be meaningless. s/rfe/feature/ and I'll +1. M -- You are currently subscribed to [email protected] as: [email protected] To unsubscribe, change settings or access archives, see http://www.ja-sig.org/wiki/display/JSG/cas-dev
