Josh French wrote ...

> I've been tagging the extensions I'm involved with for compatibility at 
> versions 0.7.1 and 0.8.0, but I've also been wondering if it wouldn't be 
> better to maintain those via branches instead of tags -- have a 0.7 branch 
> to hold bugfixes, but continue new development in 0.8 and so on.
> Thoughts on how best to manage extensions across multiple, possibly 
> incompatible, versions of Radiant?

My take on this is that it's best to keep separate branches. Following a
consistent naming scheme for the branches would be a necessity for any
sort of automated management, and would be a good idea in general.

I have one extension that, due to the changes between Rails 2.1 (as used
in Radiant 0.7.x) and Rails 2.3 (as used in Radiant 0.8), requires
separate branches. Although I intend to only add new features for use in
0.8, I still need to be able to apply bug fixes and minor enhancements
for 0.7.1. Tags just won't work in this case.

The other extensions I've been working on follow the same pattern even
though they probably could be merged into a single branch with runtime
checks to deal with the differences between 0.7 and 0.8. However, since
I don't intend to add any new functionality to the 0.7 branch, having
separate branches does provide a good indication of the differences and
will probably save me some future pain if I introduce a feature that
works in 0.8 but not in 0.7.

David Cato

Radiant mailing list

Reply via email to