Hey Blake,
On 27-Jan-09, at 12:03 PM, electBlake wrote:
In this case, I might actually do both: cut a tag representing the
0.5 release, create a branch for legacy 0.5.x development, and
start working on the 0.6 line in trunk.
Colin
This approach makes a lot of sense to me and it seems to cover all
of our bases. As long as svn storage space isn't a concern I think
this is a good plan. On the other hand, If we are considering hard-
drive space as an issue, I should note that that if we tag and
branch 0.5, there is a good chance that in 2 months we will see
another 0.5.x tag cut from the 0.5.x branch.
Don't sweat the issue of disk space. Our SVN server is equipped to
deal with these sorts of things. As Carl Forde rightly pointed out,
the semantics of tagging and branching are meaningful, and it's worth
taking advantage of them.
If there are no other thoughts or red flags that anyone sees,
tomorrow (after some final commits are done) I'm going to recommend
that we take the tag & branch approach with vulab 0.5, and do a svn
import of the latest stable CakePHP code into the trunk.
( http://cakeforge.org/frs/?group_id=23&release_id=434 )
+1. I'll give you a hand with the tagging and branching process.
Colin
---
Colin Clark
Technical Lead, Fluid Project
Adaptive Technology Resource Centre, University of Toronto
http://fluidproject.org
_______________________________________________________
fluid-work mailing list - [email protected]
To unsubscribe, change settings or access archives,
see http://fluidproject.org/mailman/listinfo/fluid-work
