Use tags for all released versions, rather than keeping branches for them. As for Struts 2.5 or 3.0, I'd probably use feature branches for those.
On Wed, Sep 11, 2013 at 10:19 AM, Christian Grobmeier <grobme...@gmail.com>wrote: > Am 11.09.13 11:24, schrieb Lukasz Lenart: > > Hi, > > > > I'd like to start discussion about the migration process - there are > > few things we must clarify, at least: > > - Git structure > > - development flow > > > > I think we should have just one repo: git.apache.org/struts.git and > > diverse versions internally via branches - so the current S2 source > > become the base and then we will transfer it to 2.5 and 3 in the > > future. > > > > As a flow I like git-flow [1] - well known and used > > +1 from me too. > My experiments with "git svn" showed me only real git is cool git. > > The structure would be pretty easy then - just take S2 and make it a repos. > > What I can't see is what the *_versionnumber branche would become. > For example: > http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/struts/struts2/branches/STRUTS_3_X/ > Is this a feature branch? Usually feature branches are "smaller" > > Cheers > Christian > > > > > [1] https://github.com/nvie/gitflow > > > > > > Regards > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@struts.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@struts.apache.org > >
