Le vendredi 16 mars, R. Andrew Ohana a écrit: > On Thu, Mar 15, 2012 at 17:59, Julien Puydt > <julien.pu...@laposte.net> wrote: > > Notice that in (1), rel1 might be what is called a "devel release" ; > > while in (2), that will just be a "stable release" : what is the > > point of having "devel releases" when your living tree is available > > for all to base their work on? > > I agree, but I think that there is still of value the notion of a > "beta". If/When we move to git, what I imagine would be something > along the line of the following: > > master branch: this is where developers should pull from the vast > majority of the time
Yes. > beta branch: these would be introduced when the release manager has > decided to cut off new features from the next release. these would be > heavily tested across many platforms until it was determined stable > enough for release, at which point we would make it a Well, yes and no : branches can be used for new development, or to test patches/branches from others. > release branch: these are static, never to be changed A release is just tagging the "master" ; branches are for live things. > As a bonus of using git is that backporting fixes for serious bugs > would be easier to maintain, since it is trivial to checkout different > branches. Yes. > Jeroen, I think what Julien is saying is that as soon as a ticket is > closed, the code would be in the what I am calling the master branch, > so anyone could pull and start rebasing their code off of it at that > moment. Yes. Snark on #sagemath -- To post to this group, send an email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel URL: http://www.sagemath.org
