+1 on 3.0 branch to trunk
+1 on more clearly defining our branching practices.
My preferred branching conventions:
- Trunk represents the ongoing path to the next release
- Release branches created from the trunk at the point of an initial RC.
- Release candidates and actual releases are tags made from the release
branch.
By the way, this suggests that we should have brought the roller 3.0 branch
back to the trunk before releasing RC1.
--a.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Dave Johnson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, September 13, 2006 2:03 PM
Subject: Re: 3.0 branch to trunk?
On 9/13/06, Allen Gilliland <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 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.
Yes, 2.x is better.
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.
This is the standing plan:
http://rollerweblogger.org/wiki/Wiki.jsp?page=RollerReleasePlan
I suggest the repository is used like this ...
+1 on everything you said, but I'm not so opposed to temporary tags as
long as they are cleaned up when no longer needed.
- Dave
