Re: [VOTE] Branching Strategy River

[Craig L Russell]

Hi Mark,

On Jan 20, 2008, at 12:26 PM, Mark Brouwer wrote:

Bob Scheifler wrote:

Craig L Russell wrote:

What was the rationale for creating multiple trunks?

I think jtsk and qatest are likely to evolve at different paces,
with somewhat different release timelines.  I think allowing
independent releases of them will be useful.
- Bob

Hi all,

I would like to perform the following branch actions in svn before


1. /river/trunk/jtsk into /river/jtsk/trunk
2. /river/trunk/qatests into /river/qatests/trunk
3. /river/jtsk/trunk into /river/jtsk/branches/2.1
4. /river/jtsk/branches/2.1 into /river/jtsk/tags/2.1.1


to be a maintenance release 2.1.x or a feature release 2.2 for reasons

go for 2.2.

committing work, before doing so I would like to ask whether there is a problem with that, or that I have to do something else before proceeding. Another thing we have to consider is whether we expect the next release to decide on which branch to commit our work. My preference would be to

Craig

The policy in many projects is to put new features into trunk (2.2) and bug fixes into both trunk and active branches (2.1).

--
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