On 01/09/2013 10:13 AM, Paul McNett wrote:
On 1/9/13 10:01 AM, Ed Leafe wrote:
On Jan 9, 2013, at 11:53 AM, Paul McNett <[email protected]> wrote:
I reverted a set of commits with changes for 1.0 from the working branch, and
instead
kept them in a new working-1.0 branch.
When I'm developing, I can have several local branches for various things, but
"working" is the only one propagated to GitHub. It is the one that devs or
users who want to test upcoming changes will use.
Dabo users should be on master if they want the stable stuff; they
shouldn't use working unless they are prepared for potential breakage. I think
that you should keep these breaking changes in working so that they get better
tested, and so we learn what we need to better document.
I had an internal debate along these lines before deciding to do this. It came
down
to liking the split between saying "here are fixes and new things we want to
put in
an upcoming minor release, please test them" versus "here are changes that will
break
prior behavior, please make the needed changes on your end and test them".
It seemed like the best of both worlds - allowing developers to track the edge
but
not necessarily bleed if they don't want to.
I wouldn't want, for example, people like John to avoid the working branch
because
too many things are broken all at once with no warning. After all, it could be
that
1.0 doesn't happen for longer than we hope, and we'll go through several minor
releases before that.
However, I'm willing to sway on this. I do agree we want people using and
understanding the changes early so they are more able to help the users when we
do
finally release 1.0.
Paul
Just make sure you update the website - I think it currently suggest
that "working " be setup.
Johnf
_______________________________________________
Post Messages to: [email protected]
Subscription Maintenance: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/dabo-users
Searchable Archives: http://leafe.com/archives/search/dabo-users
This message: http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/[email protected]
