On 30 June 2012 16:47, Andrea Aime <[email protected]> wrote:
> Master wise, if we want to release a milestone, we just tag the master? > However this will require a "out of the pool" > period, even if a small one. My reading of Justin's proposed scheme was that milestones would never be coming from the master branch, and that this would impose a well defined structure on how versions of any kind are issued. But given your question I wonder if I'm missing something ? > Assuming we have automation I guess another possible way is to have the > script make the changes > on the stable branch, commit, then commit a revert of those, and then tag > the specific revision number > that had the version number changes as the release... convoluted enough? :-p > Won't the separate release branches be a lot easier than that ? Or is there some cost to maintaining them ? Michael ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Live Security Virtual Conference Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and threat landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. Discussions will include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in malware threats. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/ _______________________________________________ GeoTools-Devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/geotools-devel
