On Wed, Aug 28, 2002 at 12:25:36PM -0700, Justin Erenkrantz wrote: > branches in CVS are awful (perhaps not so with SVN though).
I have only heard anecdotal evidence for this, but have actually used cvs branches on other large and very successful projects before. (*cough* PHP! *ahem*). I'd rather see a cvs branch than a whole new copy of the repository. We can wait until the 3.0 cycle to switch to SVN or start a new repository if we want. > Not to mention our repository is "httpd-2.0" - I don't think it makes > sense to have a 2.1 in there. > > I'm not entirely sold on splitting off to a 2.1 yet, but I think we > now have something where it is worth discussing it. -- justin I'd really like to see us start attacking smaller-grain problems and releasing those features more often, rather than lining up years and years of "ooh me too and this too" until we've got bugs coming out of our ears and nothing stable out the door for our users and testers. IMHO, a new auth framework is a *perfect* target for the next milestone, and it makes sense to call it 2.1. Any other opinions? -aaron
