With the discussions about the master and feature branches, the
following question comes to my mind.
What about this naming schema for master and feature branches? *)
In the past we had the following:
DEV300 = master/trunk/head
This will never lead to a release
OOO340 = branch
Branched from a specific DEV300 milestone to stablize the code when
coming closer to a specific release (here: OOo 3.4)
I would say we should stay with this schema to name master and feature
branches.
With the exception that is should be DEV400 instead as OOo 3.0 is done
and we are (somehow) on the way to a 4.0 version. ;-)
*)
Sorry if this is way to early to decide and not necessary before we have
a established svn repo. I just wanted to have a agreement before it's
maybe too late and a renaming to complex.
Marcus
