On 6/21/06, Jason Dillon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Why would a "branch" get moved to a "tag"? Why do we need branches
for revisions? Why are we deleting branches?
IMO, we should have a branch for each Major.Minor, where all of the
Major.Minor.Revision work happens. So branches/1.1 would hold the
active work for 1.1.x. When it is time to make a release, then svn
cp from branches/1.1 to tags/1.1.1, and then keep working on 1.1.2 on
branches/1.1
IMO, branches should never become tags. Tags only get copied to new
branches when we need to apply critical fix to a specific release,
otherwise we should just roll up the change into the next release of
the series.
I recommend minimizing branching where possible, so I don't think
that branches for 1.1.1 or 1.1.1.0 are a good idea. SVN is not that
good at merging, and making it simple (like Perforce), so lets try
not to set ourselves up for icky merges by making branches for each
release.
Hi Jason,
I agree that we should avoid branching. But I do agree with the 1.1.1
branch. It's a dead-end branch in that it's only used to prepare he
release. Applying last minute fixes and changing version numbers.
Since it's a dead-end branch, once the release if approved
moving/deleting it makes sense.
--jason
On Jun 21, 2006, at 4:14 PM, Matt Hogstrom wrote:
> After the branches/1.1 was moved to tags there was some question as
> to what happened to the 1.1 branch. At that time some kind soul
> created a new branches/1.1.1. No activity has occurred in that
> branch and given that we'll need to define the release goals of
> 1.1.1 soon I'd like to propose the following.
>
> After 1.1 is released:
>
> * Delete branches/1.1.1
> * Move branches/1.1.0 to tags/1.1.0
> * Copy tags/1.1.0 to branches/1.1.1
> * Update branches 1.1.1 to be 1.1.1-SNAPSHOT
> * Start working on 1.1.1
>
> When 1.1.1 enters time for release
>
> * Move branches/1.1.1 to branches/1.1.1.0
> * Change version from 1.1.1-SNAPSHOT to 1.1.1
> * Create release candidate rc1
> * put out for a vote
> * get a successful vote with no respins :)
> * move from branches/1.1.1.0 to tags/1.1.1.0
>
> Based on all the confusion in the past I think this procedure makes
> it clear what phase were in for the release as well as avoids
> tagging and branching repeatedly.
>
> I'm looking for lazy consensus and not a formal vote.
>
> Matt
--
Regards,
Hiram
Blog: http://hiramchirino.com
