2008/8/5 Alan Conway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > On Tue, 2008-08-05 at 13:50 +0100, Aidan Skinner wrote: >> On Tue, Aug 5, 2008 at 1:41 PM, Gordon Sim <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >> > Can you remind me the process that was agreed around branching? >> >> What I recall us settling us on was "don't, not unless there's a >> (customer money) gun to your head and it can't possibly wait until the >> next release". > > What I recall us saying is "don't until you really need one". We need > one if there is any post-M3 work going on during the freeze. I'm working > on clustering code that is well decoupled but still poses a risk of me > breaking the C++ broker. There may be others working on post-M3 work as > well. > > I'd suggest we create an M3 branch and allow post-M3 work on trunk, > merging M3 to trunk as we go. The alternative is to use trunk for M3 and > create a post-M3-branch but that seems backwards to me. > > Cheers, > Alan.
I think we should try and focus on keeping M3 on trunk if we branch then the likely hood of stabilisation and bug fixing being done is probably slim. If there is work going on that is for post-M3 then the desire to get on with that should help focus us on getting M3 out on time. I know we all have work to do that is for post-M3 but if Apache Qpid is going to actually release anything we need to work at it as well as our new features. Cheers Martin -- Martin Ritchie
