My 2 cents,
I agree on tagging, I used it a lot and always with benefits; furthermore it
is very light in CVS terms, and normally better more tags than less, so I
think that also deciding when to do a tag can be left to developers without
great worries for the JBoss Board.
I would agree also on branching, but I found it not so simple and quite
painful on merging, requires a lot more attention from developers since you
can really mess things. Therefore I would not recommend it, as not everyone
has deep CVS merging experience (me included). If a group is developing
something that will eventually finish into main trunk, then I think is
simpler doing changes locally and discuss on the list if it is the case to
commit it or not and where (maybe for example under contrib module).
Well, just my 2 cents with the experience I have with CVS.
Simon
> Hi,
>
> sorry if I missed substantial decisions on jboss-devel, but I
> would like to
> take the opportunity to convince you of an increased use of
> cvs-tags and
> branches ....
>
> IMHO, branching and tagging allows us to easily (i.e., not via bloody
> e-mail) share and coordinate coden changes that are not
> already bullet-proof
> at an early stage of development --- without polluting the current
> "mainline".
>
> We at infor use a model where the "official" source release
> (that serves as
> the basis for developing any extensions) has no tag and lies
> on the root
> branch. I.e., if someone simply checks out the module without
> additional
> revision annotations, he automatically receives this release.
>
> Branches and symbolic tags are used to manage tiny and quite local
> sub-projects (our devel cycles for features are typically 1-2
> weeks long).
> An example would be that I would start a new branch in the
> org/ejb/deployment package named "generalApplicationDeployment".
>
> Everybody interested/participating in this project could then
> checkout the
> directory (or the root) using the sticky tag name for the
> branch with the
> option "If no matching revision is found, use the most recent
> one", e.g.,
> from WinCVS (sorry, don�t know the commandline switch ...) ...
>
> When the sub-project is finished or has provided a bug-fix
> for some problem
> in the mainline that should be incorporated ASAP, the project
> manager is
> responsible for merging the branch(the fix) into the mainline ...
>
> Any opinions about this proposal?
>
> CGJ
>
>
