Re: SVN and issues with branching / consider how we use SVN going forward

[Alex Harui]

On 8/8/12 9:14 AM, "labri...@digitalprimates.net"
<labri...@digitalprimates.net> wrote:

>> So again I ask.  How do you intend you merge from unstable to trunk persons A
>> changes when the unstable branch containts persons A, B, C, D, E and F
>> changes and each may of made multiple check ins at different times. As far
>> >as I'm aware there's no easy way to do it (even if you look up exact
>> revision numbers).
> 
> Just as another thought, this is the basic model we use when using Git. It
> won't work as well with SVN, as easy branching is Git's killer feature...
> however, maybe that is an argument for a change of direction:
> 
> http://nvie.com/posts/a-successful-git-branching-model/
> 
> Just ponder it. It does work in practice.
> 
> Mike
> 
Interesting read.  Are you also pushing to make Git the default SCM?

I'm not sure how far away we are from this model in some respects.  We have
whiteboards which sort of decentralize new development, and I am proposing
an "unstable" branch that maps to the "develop" branch in the article (and
"master" is "trunk").

I don't know that I'd go with release branches if we can get enough folks to
pound on the promotions from unstable to trunk when they go in.

And to answer Justin's question, merging by revision number worked pretty
well for us.  But yes, every once in a while you will hit merge-hell.  I'm
just saying it is worth it in order to protect the integrity of trunk.


-- 
Alex Harui
Flex SDK Team
Adobe Systems, Inc.
http://blogs.adobe.com/aharui