Unfortunately there's no simple fix.
Sure. Kill branches as soon as possible so we don't need a process
for dealing with them.
ok, so then maintaining the branch becomes a trivial exercise "after 2*
months it's dead and new code is always in HEAD and you don't have to
migrate it to the branch) *arbitrary figure
Obviously Ant doesn't have a full-time SCM manager/release manager
and this may be
Let me take a bit of pressure out of this.
Every committer has taken the responsibility to merge or not merge
changes into the branch on him/herself. A process where the
(volunteer) release manager had to approve each merge simply wouldn't
scale IMHO.
Ok I can see why there isn't a "release manager" as such based on the
amount of effort it would be to track the changes, it would also be a
thankless task if there was one!
Also note that the Ant PMC is responible for the releases, not the
release manager.
I know that you know that and didn't mean to imply anything else
Well actually I didn't know that - so thanks for informing me ;). Ok
kidding I knew the PMC was ultimately responsible for the release
(in
particular I deliberately took the quote out of context), just wanted
to stress my POV again.
No worries - I've got some boring docs to write here, so I'm more than
willing to discuss something "extra-curricular" than get on with my real
work...
Kev
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
