Hi Mark, On Dec 21, 2007, at 4:53 AM, Mark Brouwer wrote:
No denial here (I think). The proposal mentions the /trunk as the main line of development, /maintenance when we are feature ready for a release (to provide support for releases) and the /tags for the actual releases.The /branches branch kept for any branch to be found necessary, reasons for branching can be many and probably hard to capture under one policy.I called it therefore adhoc (dunno whether that is the best word), in case there is a possibility to achieve the same result with less troubles I'm in for that, if not and we need to branch I would like tosee that branch in the /branches branch and not being mixed up with the/maintenance branch because for that we have a uniform policy. BTW as I noticed there was not much participation of others related to this subject, do we need to bring this up for an official vote?
Since there has not been enough participation to claim consensus, I'd recommend that you put forward your proposal in the form of a VOTE thread so folks have a chance to weigh in on this issue.
It sounds like the main issue is what to call the maintenance and the skunkworks parts of the code tree, having agreed on trunk and tags. Jukka likes branches for maintenance and skunk for skunkworks. Mark likes maintenence for maintenance and branches for skunkworks.
So my recommendation is that you call a VOTE and state your preference, let the vote run a week (normally 3 days but these are extraordinary times) and see who votes.
Craig
-- Mark
Craig Russell Architect, Sun Java Enterprise System http://java.sun.com/products/jdo 408 276-5638 mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] P.S. A good JDO? O, Gasp!
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
