I guess we only need 1 branch though, however many releases we end up doing from the 1.x branch
2008/10/29 Jonathan Anstey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > Yeah, if we put out the next 1.x release as 1.6, 1.7, 1.8, etc. I'd be fine > with that. I think I was just trying to minimize the number of possible 1.x > releases we could put out. For example, I didn't want this to occur: Camel > 1.5.1, 1.5.2, 1.5.3, 1.6.0, 1.6.1, etc etc etc etc :) > > James Strachan wrote: >> >> Am liking 1.x for the same reasons as Willem now :) >> >> 2008/10/29 Willem Jiang <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: >> >>> >>> I perfer to use camel-1.x , since we could release camel 1.5.x or camel >>> 1.6 >>> from this branch. >>> If we don't want to release camel 1.6 or camel 1.7, we could use >>> camel-1.5 >>> as the branch name. >>> >>> Just my two cents. >>> >>> Willem/ >>> >>> On Wed, Oct 29, 2008 at 9:47 PM, Jonathan Anstey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>> wrote: >>> >>> >>>> >>>> Now that the 1.5 release is pretty much complete I'm thinking of setting >>>> up >>>> a branch so we can start hacking on 2.0 stuff more freely. I guess there >>>> are >>>> several options on names >>>> >>>> http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/activemq/camel/branches/camel-1.5 >>>> http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/activemq/camel/branches/camel-1.5.x >>>> http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/activemq/camel/branches/camel-1.x >>>> >>>> I prefer camel-1.5 since it follows ActiveMQ's branching convention - >>>> does >>>> anybody else have a preference? >>>> >>>> I'm also going to set up http://www.orcaware.com/svn/wiki/Svnmerge.py on >>>> that branch so we can have nice merge tracking between trunk and the >>>> branch. >>>> >>>> Cheers, >>>> Jon >>>> >>>> >> >> >> >> > > -- James ------- http://macstrac.blogspot.com/ Open Source Integration http://fusesource.com/
