Chris Hostetter wrote:
this is the past thread i was thinking about before...
http://www.archivum.info/java-dev@lucene.apache.org/2006-06/msg00012.html
...refering to leaving the release branches clean untill just before a
point release when all the desired changes can get merged in.
That's the way I find it easiest to manage. Otherwise you have to
remember which patches have been applied to the branch and which have
not. So I prefer to merge them to the branch them all-at-once. However
if the branch diverges from trunk much then that's impractical.
allthough now i'm more confused about how exactly "Fix Version" should be
used ... Doug seemed to be advocating one usage in that htread, and a
differnet usage in the more recent thread.
Fix Version should name the first release that the patch is intended to
appear in. This may or may not correspond directly to the subversion
branch that the patch is committed to.
Another approach is to make all patches first in the release branch,
then merge them to trunk. Personally I find that to be a pain, but it
might be more scalable. It keeps things synchronized between Jira and
subversion.
it seems like we really need a wiki on how we *want* to use the various
fields in Jira (assignee, "New", "Pathc available", "Fix Version", etc...)
+1
Doug
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
