> Assuming we are planning a 2.1.1 (which I think we are), I would like it
if
> we branched as well as tagged the 2.1 release so that some of the bigger
> changes for 3.0 can get underway without us worrying about code freezes
and
> regression errors and whatever else.
Serge,
I would not be surprised to see 2.1.x, where x is not a terribly small
number. James v3 might take quite some time, and we'll want to make sure
that new mechanisms (new DB layer, new repository interfaces, hopefully
changes to spooler, etc.) are stable.
So is a branch the right way to do this if we have continued patching on the
current, stable, release, and major development on a new version? Should we
request a james-v3 cvs module, as Tomcat seems to use? Or is a branch
sufficient?
I would expect that we'd want to be able to easily work with either set of
code. Again, I know how I'd do this with SourceSafe, but CVS is a pretty
primitive beast (I hope that Subversion is smarter about code sharing).
--- Noel
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
