On Sep 13, 2006, at 12:06 PM, Allen Gilliland wrote:
That sounds right to me, but I think branches/roller_2.x makes more sense. It's just a matter of convention, but I think that 2.x suggests that it's the ongoing branch for 2.x development, if there is any.+1 generally. What I think is missing is how to handle minor revisions, e.g. 3.1. Proposal detail below...We should probably have a little bit of discussion about what we want for the standard way of trunk -> branch -> tag process. I don't think we have followed any strict conventions up until now, and it would be nice to actually do that.I suggest the repository is used like this ... trunk - do main work herebranches/roller_3.0 - only used during RC phase for a release, becomes a tag when RC is approved.branches/whatever - used when development can't be done in trunk. i.e. branches/roller_3.1_tagging or branches/roller_jdobackendtags/roller_X.x - final resting place for releases. these never change.
6. Continuing development on a release is done by creating another branch, e.g. svn copy ...branches/roller_3.0 .../branches/roller_3.1 7. Some fixes are merged from trunk into branches/roller_3.1 and other fixes are applied directly if they are not applicable to trunk.So the release process is ... 1. do some amount of work in the trunk.2. you think that it's worthy of release and copy trunk to a branch with release number and create an RC from that branch.3. community evaluates and votes on that RC.4. if changes are needed they are done to the trunk and merged into the branch, then a new RC is created and we go back to step #3. 5. when an RC is approved by the community the branch is moved to a tag and the release goes out.
Repeat from 3 for release of 3.1
this way when a release is at the RC stage the trunk is still free for further development which does not have to affect the branch used for creating the release. then the tags are just for archiving purposes.i am open to any changes in this process, i mainly just want a documented process so that anyone could follow the steps and know exactly what to do. i also think this makes sense because it keeps the repository clean so it's easy to know what's being used and how. some things that seem worth fixing to me are ...tags/roller_2.2_scrapped/ tags/roller_2.4_alpha1/neither of those are *final* releases, so i'm not sure why they are tagged. i think it's easy to just say, tags are only releases that go public, everything else is a branch. also, we don't have a roller_2.1 tag, which is not cool :/branches/roller_2.3/do we still need that for something? i would think that after a release goes public it's branch is no longer needed because work continues in the trunk, or if it was the last in a major rev then work continues in the .x branch for that major rev.anyways, what do you guys think?
I'm not exactly clear on the difference between a branch and a tag. IANASE (I am not an svn expert)
Craig
-- Allen Dave Johnson wrote:Yes, I'd like to make Roller 3.0 the trunk as soon as possible. Anybody object to this? 1) move trunk to branches/roller_2.4_unreleased 2) move branches/roller_3.0 to trunk - Dave On 9/13/06, Allen Gilliland <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:any reason why we can't do this now? -- Allen
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
