Dan Creswell wrote:
Mark Brouwer wrote:
Jim Hurley wrote:
If folks think that is needed or would be helpful to figure out other
svn management issues - that's cool. I'm not the right person to lead
that discussion, so (if it's important) someone should grab the ball
and get it started...
I don't believe it is necessary to draft guidelines with regard to
branching at this stage, having said that ...
I wonder if we should be keeping an eye on things like Mercurial....
Neither do I, it is a nice tool to push and pull changes to other
committers and could be handy when various River developers want to work
simultaneously on a certain feature.
[snip]
That brings me to my most important point, what is withholding us from
branching the current trunk into a release X and we start with the next
phase where people can work on what they want to work on.
One consideration at least in the future if things go well will be the
issues that Linus has had to confront. The desire for most to work on
new and cool stuff rather than support or help with the process of a
release.....
I expect people responsible for features that get into a certain release
will also provide the support for getting that release out and to
provide ongoing support. I don't believe there are people who can
only work on the latest and greatest stuff, anyone with an an installed
based is haunted by its legacy, sooner or later.
So I'm just asking for a little experiment, shall we just start and see
what happens now that we are 'feature' complete for the first release.
Progress is 'slow' here, the words of Jim not mine ;-) and improvements
to the Jini core infrastructure stalled for over 2 years now, at least
in a way that it is generally available. I think we should be concerned
about that.
--
Mark
