On Fri, 2005-10-21 at 11:53, Henri Yandell wrote: > On 10/21/05, Dave Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > On Oct 21, 2005, at 12:34 PM, Allen Gilliland wrote: > > > branches/roller-1.x (any continued development against 1.x happens > > > here) > > > trunk (current development branch representing 2.x) > > > tags/roller-1.3 (snapshot for the 1.3 release) > > > > > > ... then after the 2.0 release ... > > > > > > tags/roller-2.0 > > > > > > etc,etc. > > > > > > the idea being that we keep the number of development branches limited > > > to just 1 branch per major version number, but we can still keep a > > > record of each release using the tags dir. does that make sense? or > > > is that convoluted? > > > > +1 > > +1 here. 1 branch per major version sounds good. > > Am assuming that we would treat the tags/* as read-only and open > branches up when we want to make changes.
yeah, the tags/* would be read-only. -- Allen > > I really miss the concept of tags in CVS; faking them in SVN always > feels so empty. > > Hen
