Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote: > [...] > 2) Master is virtual, dev1..N are concrete, one dev form is Most Favored > Nation Status so something coherent can be shoved into SVN (Q: is MFNS > necessary? Nice, yes, but necessary?)
I definitely think that it is necessary (where J2SE5 is the preferred devtarget), at least during the initial transition to using the processing tool. It's (I think) the least intrusive method for starting to slowly add non-J2SE5 code in the development trunk while letting existing J2SE5 developers continue developing without changing the way they've been using up to now. By leaving the preferred devtarget in svn, the hordes of existing J2SE developers will have the choice of continuing to use simple "svn co/ci" to work on the code and won't have to learn to use new, yet not fully tested tools. It also lets the smaller number of non-J2SE5 developers test the processing tools and help identify bugs (what!? :-P) and usability problems without forcing J2SE developers into doing the same. Maybe, in the longer term, it would make sense to have some kind of canonical "master" form, and store that in svn, but I am a big fan of the least disturbance path, when trying to put in place new processes in an ongoing development project. :-) Question: What would be the advantage (in the longer term) of putting, in the Subversion trunk, source code in non-compilable canonical master form, instead of compilable preferred devtarget form? Why is the existence of "master" so important to you? Etienne PS: Tim, Thanks so much for providing clear answers and examples explaining the approach! -- Etienne M. Gagnon, Ph.D. http://www.info2.uqam.ca/~egagnon/ SableVM: http://www.sablevm.org/ SableCC: http://www.sablecc.org/
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
