In Subversion, a tag can be promoted to a branch. With the way the global revisions works, tagging doesn't seem as important as it was with CVS, but it still seems like a good practice to follow.
Generally, you only need to branch when you * Need to fix something between scheduled releases * Want to experiment with a revolutionary line of development. The Java team is alternating odd and even releases, for bug-fixes and features, but I don't know if we need to adopt that practice for the C# code base. We have a ticket in regarding the eyebrowse archive. * http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-138 I'm sure it will be fixed eventually. -Ted. On Mon, 10 Jan 2005 22:54:46 -0500, roberto wrote: > Oh, forgot one thing…Any plans to register the ibatis.net domain? > > Roberto > > > -----Original Message----- > From: roberto [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Monday, January 10, 2005 10:53 PM > To: ibatis-dev@incubator.apache.org > Subject: Subversion and a few other Qs > > Hi. I noticed that the WUSH.NET repository is changing structure. > > Is this in prep to move the repository to Apache with iBATIS for > Java also in Subversion? Is there a firmer date for this move? > > How will the branching work (will there actually be branches)? I > seem to recall reading that iBATIS for Java was going for a release > schedule like: .0 new features -> .1 bug fixes -> .2 new features - > > .3 bug fixes etc (or maybe I made that up or mixed it up with my > projects at work! LOL). Is iBATIS.NET also headed for the same > release pattern? > > How is the documentation update for Java going to be handled? I > know that the DocBook-based Data Mapper Guide for .NET is now split > up into various chapter files, but there is .NET-specific content > in the “common” files, such as in examples and explanatory text. > Are the Java and .NET docs really going to share the same “common” > files with the Developer Guide chapters being more specific > > Is EyeBrowse still in the works for the email list archives? I do > use mail-archive.com right now. > > Thanks! > > Roberto
