On Mon, Dec 1, 2008 at 6:26 PM, Michael Clark <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote:
> Arthur Blake wrote: > > On Mon, Dec 1, 2008 at 5:16 PM, Michael Clark > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED] <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> wrote: > > > > Arthur Blake wrote: > > > Any comments on this, or shall I just check it in? > > > I was thinking about checking it in for 1.3 branch (creating one if > > > necessary) and the trunk both... > > > > It looks good to me. I wouldn't bother with a branch for 1.3 - > > this is a > > bug fix, the code change is small and all the tests pass. > > > > > > I think a branch *is* necessary since the trunk has changed quite a > > lot since 1.3... otherwise how else would I do it? > > I don't want to modify the 1.3 tag directly! > > (would not we always do it this way after the main release has been > > done, no matter how trivial the change??) > > > > The branch is there already: > > http://svn.jabsorb.org/svn/jabsorb/branches/1.3/ > > We just need to backport the patch onto that branch and commit against > the branch then make a tag for the release. > > The normal source code control practices is to make a branch before for > a major release exactly so we have a place to position to place these > minor maintenance bug fixes. We have so far been following these > practices (the branch was created at 1.3 release time by William). > > After this minor patch releases is committed, we make a tag off of that > branch. e.g. > > svn copy https://svn.jabsorb.org/svn/jabsorb/branches/1.3/ \ > https://svn.jabsorb.org/svn/jabsorb/tags/1.3.1/ > > e.g. branch for major releases, tags for minor releases. > Ah good. I wasn't aware that was done. I should have looked first ;) Thanks.
_______________________________________________ Jabsorb-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.jabsorb.org/mailman/listinfo/jabsorb-dev
