At 12:19 PM 1/19/2005, Paul Querna wrote: >William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote: >> svn cp .../trunk .../branches/1.1 >>Or if we decided not to use trunk, we can also >> svn cp .../tags/1.1.0 .../branches/1.1 > >^^ that was my plan. (branches/1.1.x/)
The only question you hadn't answered, do we need trunk = 1.2 today, or can trunk remain 1.1.x until a feature patch drives us to split 1.1.x from 1.2? I ask because changes to head would likely be desirable for 1.1.1 until we really drive to release 1.2.0. >>One final commentary, is it really necessary to keep trying >>to sync version numbers of apr and apr-util? E.g. apr-iconv >>hasn't changed, it shouldn't need a bump/release at all. > >I don't think it is a requirement for minor point releases. but it makes sense >in this case since both have had major additions/changes since 1.0.x. Agreed today, and apr-iconv shouldn't be pushed at this time, I don't think. [I'll have to look.] Bill
