Since my opinion on the matter has been misinterpreted previously, let me try to restate it here.
After a branch, all changes should be made to the trunk. If a branch has a major-priority error that has been fixed in trunk, it should be merged back to the branch (and ideally, a new minor branch release would be made <1.1.major.minor>). There may be times when a major branch bug cannot be fixed on trunk, at which point applying the fix solely to the branch would be appropriate. On 8/8/06, Wendy Smoak <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
After Core 1.1.4 is done, should we delete the tomahawk branch that was created on June 21st, and re-copy it from the 1.1.5-SNAPSHOT trunk? I think there have been several changes on the trunk that ought to be in the next release, and it's probably easier to start over. Which brings up another point. IMO, after the branch, development should continue on the trunk, and changes should be merged to the branch if they absolutely must be in the release. To me, the branch exists to protect the release from late breaking changes, but I've seen posts that promote the opposite, applying fixes to the branch and merging them back to the trunk. If you plan to work on the Tomahawk release, which way do you prefer to do it? -- Wendy
