> -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: 20 November 2003 16:46 > To: Maven Developers List > Subject: RE: Version 1.0, 1.1, HEAD and BRANCHES (was 1.0 RE: [VOTE] Make > groupId mandatory for POM version 4?) > > J�rg Schaible <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on 21/11/2003 > 02:21:10 AM: > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote on Thursday, November 20, 2003 3:41 PM: > > > > > "Vincent Massol" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on 20/11/2003 08:05:18 > > > PM: > > > > > >> I guess it all depends on the question of whether we wish to link POM > > >> versions to Maven releases. I think, I'm being swayed and I agree > > >> it's cleaner to link them.... > > >> > > >> <thinking some more> > > >> > > >> Ok, I think I've realized what the problem is: We are developing > > >> 1.0-RC1 on HEAD. This is the main problem. Normally here's how I > > >> would expect development to work: > > >> > > >> - HEAD always contains latest development for the *next* release > > >> (that would be 1.1-SNAPSHOT for us) > > > > > > The next release for us is 1.0, not 1.1-SNAPSHOT. We haven't had a 1.0 > > > yet. > > > > Well, but 1.0 is currently freezed. So development of new features > > is not possible without a branch. You can therefore branch for > > features or for the upcoming release. Normally it is easier to > > handle the branch for the upcoming release (supposed to have bug fixed > only). > > How is 1.0 frozen? > > There are still lots of changes to be made, admittedly bug fixes and small > changes, before 1.0.
That's what frozen means = frozen for new stuff. Where do you put new stuff? In a branch? What branch? That's a strange way of doing it as the HEAD is supposed to always contain the latest development. -Vincent --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
