Thanks to everyone for thinking through the issues here. This has been
very helpful. I don't understand the practical advantages of a copy
versus a branch, particularly since I will have to create a branch
eventually. I could use some more education here. What would be the
objections to the following scheme? A big advantage to this scheme is
that it's something I can wrap my mind around:
1) I create a 10.2 branch.
2) I turn on the beta bit in that branch.
3) I generate the beta candidate from that branch.
4) In the meantime, bug fixes accumulate in the trunk.
5) At some point I mega-merge the trunk into the 10.2 branch based on a
triggering event:
a) triggered by the need to generate a new release candidate
b) triggered by the checkin of destabilizing work such as a partial
feature
6) After the mega-merge, fixes must be applied to both the trunk and the
10.2 branch.
Thanks again for helping me work through these issues.
Regards,
-Rick
