Matt,
That's an excellent idea in principle; however, the challenge is coming
up with the process to decide what's stable. How bad does a bug have to
be to prevent a revision from getting tagged? Who does the evaluation?
Who "moves" the tag?
Automated unit tests with some scripts that manipulate the repository
are usually the answer to this, but the maintenance of unit tests is
usually a non-trivial effort.
The easiest thing to do is just keep a working copy of your own, and
make your own decisions as to whether something is stable enough for
your environment.
Matt Kaatman wrote:
Couldn't you have a tag called stable and move that tag with each stable
release so that someone who checks it out will always be able to get the
latest release tagged as stable without picking a specific version?
(So you'd probably double tag with each stable release. One tag with the
version number that is constant and one that is called stable which
moves with each stable release.)
Eric Stadtherr wrote:
Jason,
In general, branches aren't intended for "stable" snapshots - they exist
as ongoing work areas to manage some parallel development that needs
configuration control but cannot impact the baseline. Branches are
usually merged back into the baseline when the parallel development is
complete. In Subversion, the convention is to create "tags" for
snapshots of revisions that have some meaning. If you look in the
RoundCube /tags directory, you'll see the latest revision that was
considered "stable," i.e. the v0.1-beta2 version.
Jason wrote:
I was checking out svn.roundcube.net and it looks like there isn't a
branch that I can checkout/update that'll always give me the latest
stable release. Am I missing something, or could a /branches/stable
be created that was always the latest stable released version?
Thanks,
Jason
--
*Eric Stadtherr*
[EMAIL PROTECTED] <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
