On Jun 15, 2006, at 10:26 AM, David Jencks wrote:
On Jun 15, 2006, at 9:58 AM, Donald Woods wrote:
I have to say, that Aaron's view of SVN usage (keeping branches/
1.1 around for all 1.1.x releases) makes a lot more sense to me
than forcing people to switch to new branch names...
We should have made a branches/1.1.0 copy from 1.1 , which could
then be moved to Tags once the voting is done. If a major bug
needed fixing due to a -1, then you fix it in branches/1.1.0 and
branches/1.1, respin the 1.1.0 build, revote and then move it to
Tags. That would let people continue working on branches/1.1 with
known items that should go into 1.1.1 and gives you a way to fix
any last minute 1.1.0 release bugs if needed....
Here are my opinions:
-1 on ever removing a branch that we have reasonable expectations
of doing bug fixes on, such as 1.1.
My impression is that we have all agreed repeatedly over and over
that branches such as 1.1 can get bug fixes but NO NEW FEATURES.
Therefore,
+1 to COPYING branches/1.1 to tags/1.1.x for each 1.1.x release,
then building the 1.1.x stuff from that tag.
-0.5 to copying branches/1.1 to branches/1.1.x and then copying or
moving to tags/1.1.x Since ONLY BUG FIXES can possibly be added to
branches/1.1, this should not cause problems. The release manager
gets say over what goes into a release, they can revert changes
they don't want in the release. I think the copy to branches/1.1.x
just adds steps for no gain.
Unlike moving tags in cvs, deleting and recreating tags in svn does
not lose any history. Therefore I'm not very worried by Bill's
concern about "changing" tags: my concern is that no one updates
the contents, but deleting a tag and recreating it later isn't a
problem to my sense of history :-). However if we decide that
deleting tags is not such a great idea perhaps we could use build
numbers
tags/1.1.1-3 for the third attempt to come up with a 1.1.1 release.
I left one out...
-0.75 on bug-fixing on a sequence of branches/1.1.1, branches/
1.1.2, .... I don't get why this is a plausible idea.
thanks
david jencks
thanks
david jencks
-Donald
David Blevins wrote:
On Jun 15, 2006, at 8:40 AM, Aaron Mulder wrote:
Why not copied to tags/1.1.0 so that branches/1.1 would continue
to be
available for 1.1.1-SNAPSHOT? That would have the advantage of not
disrupting anyone's work if there was code that wasn't checked in
pending 1.1.1,
[edit]
Are there any advanatages at all to
moving the branch away?
Exactly that, to make sure people don't "move on" and checkin
work on branches/1.1 for 1.1.1 where there is a freeze on
branches/1.1 for preparing v1.1 (which may not pass it's vote
and have to be redone).
Probably should have created the 1.1.1 branch immediately, no
biggie. I went ahead and made now.
plus it wouldn't require everyone to do a full checkout
of the identical code for 1.1.1.
It doesn't require a full checkout.
svn switch https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/geronimo/branches/1.1.1
-David
