I'd try to contact the people that committed some code on this branches.

Lucie
-- 
six feet up, inc.  |  "Nowhere to go but open source"
Direct Line +1 (317) 861-5948 x605
http://www.sixfeetup.com  |  Zope/Plone Custom Development + Hosting



On Sat, Aug 15, 2009 at 5:04 PM, Brandon Craig
Rhodes<[email protected]> wrote:
>
> As I look over the GetPaid source tree, is it rude of me to ask about
> all of the branches that exist, and which ones can be retired?  Branches
> are an awkward form of "technical debt" to keep around, since as a
> branch gets older, the amount of work required to eventually merge its
> good ideas back into the trunk gets greater and greater.
>
> Here are the outstanding branches of the whole project (for the moment,
> I'm ignoring the 26 different branches that exist of individual getpaid
> packages), ranked in the order of which have gone the longest without
> being touched (where "touched" means "having an svn commit made against
> it").  None have been touched in at least a year:
>
>  Branch                             Last commit             "Oldness"
>  ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>  corneti-anon-multipay/             2007-08-18 14:46:27     2 years
>  ups-integration/                   2007-10-13 17:40:43     1 yr 10 mo
>  getpaid.core-catalog-refactoring/  2007-10-15 12:41:28     1 yr 10 mo
>  kapilt-dev/                        2008-02-08 11:08:04     1 yr 6 mo
>  optional-fields-for-checkout/      2008-05-29 09:52:02     1 yr 2 mo
>  recurring-payment/                 2008-06-05 17:02:56     1 yr 2 mo
>  matt-form-schemas-experiment/      2008-06-08 01:06:11     1 yr 2 mo
>  salesforce_integration/            2008-08-01 15:36:07     1 year
>
> Because of how terribly primitive Subversion is, there is no automated
> way for me to tell which of these branches ever got committed to trunk;
> which were abandoned; and which should be kept around.
>
> I would love to be able to "svn remove" whichever of these branches are
> no longer active projects.  Thanks to version control, we can always
> resurrect a branch that we delete with a quick "svn cp" from the version
> at which they last existed before deletion.
>
> Removing the inactive branches from the source tree will be a *very*
> helpful form of cleanup for those of us looking to develop on the
> project, since before making a change I'll want to check all of the
> "active" branches to see if someone else has started touching the same
> code that I myself am thinking about working on - if so, I can ask them
> about their changes and make sure we don't step on each others' toes.
>
> Thanks for any info!
>
> --
> Brandon Craig Rhodes   [email protected]   http://rhodesmill.org/brandon
>
> >
>

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"getpaid-dev" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
[email protected]
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/getpaid-dev?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to