On Fri, Jul 1, 2011 at 10:20 AM, Alexandro Colorado <[email protected]>wrote:
> > > On Fri, Jul 1, 2011 at 10:13 AM, Marcus (OOo) <[email protected]>wrote: > >> Am 07/01/2011 04:56 PM, schrieb Alexandro Colorado: >> >> On Fri, Jul 1, 2011 at 9:46 AM, Marcus (OOo)<[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>> >>> Am 06/30/2011 04:03 AM, schrieb Alexandro Colorado: >>>> >>>> On Wed, Jun 29, 2011 at 8:33 AM, Marcus (OOo)<[email protected]> >>>> >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Sorry, it seems I wasn't clear enough. >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> I don't think about how to name directories and files in the SVN repo >>>>>> itself. Sure we can stick with the schema like it is done in other >>>>>> projects. >>>>>> It's more a general thing how to present trunk and branches to the >>>>>> outside. >>>>>> >>>>>> E.g., when we release bits we have to make clear into which direction >>>>>> they >>>>>> point. It's a difference if we use a name like "branch 3.4.x" or tell >>>>>> the >>>>>> people it's "OOO 3.4.0" or maybe "AOOO 3.4.0". >>>>>> >>>>>> So, I don't think that a trailing 0 is not ? when it is the 3.4.0 >>>>>> release. >>>>>> And the OOO is still necessary to show it's from our project. Of >>>>>> course >>>>>> it >>>>>> could be "AOOO" or whatever we will agree to. >>>>>> >>>>>> How to name the release files is another thing. There should be a >>>>>> clear >>>>>> structure to keep it simple and straight for scripts. But this is a >>>>>> topic >>>>>> for later. >>>>>> >>>>>> I hope it's more clear now. ;-) >>>>>> >>>>>> My bad also misconstruct the naming conversation. Well we used to >>>>> have >>>>> different branches each with a name OOODEV was for the always >>>>> development >>>>> branch and OOO for the actual release branches. >>>>> >>>> >>>> I don't remember OOODEV as a name somewhere. >>>> >>>> So usually they got rid of the dots for clarity, and added a m for >>>> >>>>> milestone: >>>>> http://development.openoffice.org/releases/ >>>>> and DEV: >>>>> http://development.openoffice.org/releases/dev_index.html >>>>> >>>> >>>> I'm sorry but I don't understand what you want to express with the both >>>> links. Please can you describe it in other words? >>>> >>> >>> I am pointing you to the naming of the branches and their dinamics. Isn't >>> that what you were addressing at first? Not sure what you mean by not >>> >> >> Yes, that's right. >> >> >> remembering OOODEV as a name, after you saw the link with the OOODEV >>> branch. >>> >> >> There is no OOODEV on the webpage. It's speaking about DEV and OOO >> milestones. > > > You sure? there is the unstable codeline: > http://development.openoffice.org/releases/dev_index.html#dev300 > You dont get the OOO till the actual filename download. I guess it was > getting long. > If you go to the latest DEV300m106 http://development.openoffice.org/releases/DEV300m106_snapshot.html you'll see: This snapshot build will install as OOo-Dev 3.4. > > >> >> >> Marcus >> >> >> >> Am 06/29/2011 03:03 PM, schrieb Greg Stein: >>>> >>>>> >>>>>> On Wed, Jun 29, 2011 at 08:09, Marcus (OOo)<[email protected]> >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> 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 >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> We're using Subversion, and nearly every svn repository across the >>>>>>> planet names this "trunk". Unless there is a specific reason to vary >>>>>>> from that, I don't see why we'd want to name the directory "DEV300". >>>>>>> >>>>>>> OOO340 = branch >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Branched from a specific DEV300 milestone to stablize the code when >>>>>>>> coming >>>>>>>> closer to a specific release (here: OOo 3.4) >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Branches can be named whatever we'd like. My own preference would >>>>>>> be >>>>>>> to call this: /branches/3.4.x >>>>>>> >>>>>>> The "OOO" is awfully redundant, and the last digit ("0") doesn't make >>>>>>> sense since we would be releasing patches from the branch such as >>>>>>> 3.4.1. The "3.4.x" naming is used by many products, and it has worked >>>>>>> out very well. >>>>>>> >>>>>> > > > -- > *Alexandro Colorado* > *OpenOffice.org* Español > http://es.openoffice.org > > -- *Alexandro Colorado* *OpenOffice.org* Español http://es.openoffice.org
