I agree with you and Antonio. ben
On Monday 26 November 2007 17:11:56 Olga Natkovich wrote: > I think creating branches is a better option for reasons listed by > Antonio. If nobody objects to this, we could add this info to our > development process. > > Olga > > -----Original Message----- > From: Antonio Magnaghi [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Monday, November 26, 2007 4:46 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: guideline on branching > > I have a general question about how to handle a common situation. > > > > I would like to start some work to implement features as described in > spec docs on the wiki, namely the abstraction layer portion. This will, > most likely, require multiple check-ins. > > > > On one side, I could take a snap shot of the code base and work locally > on my dev machine. I don't think this is ideal for several reasons: this > would prevent others interested in the work to give feedback as I > progress, additionally I would need to back up my code periodically... > > > > One other possibility is to just make a branch, work on the branch and > then, when the changes have been approved, merge the branch with the > head. However, branching requires some coordination: to decide what > feature(s) really deserve a branch, avoid excessive branch > proliferation, coordination to merge the branch... > > > > In general, do we have some guideline to follow in this regard? > > > > Thanks, > > -a.
