Nicolas Weeger wrote:
What will be the next server version? 1.7.1 or 1.8.0?
If no one object, i'll put a tag for the release candidate tomorrow or
friday, so people can again break cvs with commits :)
Got my system stable again, and upload 1.8.0 right now. So feel free to
commit away.
tchize wrote:
Joining thread a bit late, trolling a bit perhaps :)
I personnaly would enjoy a branch policy on crossfire cvs (whatever it is, a
bad decision is always better than no decision).
I don't think we need branching at each release (unless we
want to keep a few weeks after release a
Joining thread a bit late, trolling a bit perhaps :)
I personnaly would enjoy a branch policy on crossfire cvs (whatever it is, a
bad decision is always better than no decision).
I don't think we need branching at each release (unless we
want to keep a few weeks after release a bugfixing branch
Mark Wedel wrote:
Using tags may actually make more sense.
Right now, when I make the actual release, I tag the files, so you
can do something like 'cvs checkout -r rel-1-7-0'.
But as described about, not until a change happens do you need a
branch. So what should probably be done is at
Hello.
The other issue is that generally, I'm not seeing so many commits that
having people hold off a week would seem like much an issue.
Well of course we can always wait one or two weeks to add features. But
sometimes it's things we'd rather have people test fast than wait weeks.
Also need
Hello.
I was wondering about the opportunity of making branches when we get
close to releases.
It would let people go on committing to HEAD, while ensuring code can be
stabilized for release.
Opinions? Flames? Comments?
Ryo
___
crossfire mailing
sounds like a good idea.
On 7/30/05, Nicolas Weeger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hello.
I was wondering about the opportunity of making branches when we get
close to releases.
It would let people go on committing to HEAD, while ensuring code can be
stabilized for release.
Opinions?
Alex Schultz wrote:
I think it might be good, though it might complicate things a little
bit. I currently don't know anything about dealing with different
branches in cvs, but I'm sure I could learn easily if I need to.
I too think it would be good idea.
And I don't think it would complicate
I'd be more concerned about this if there were lots of commits going on,
or there was a real desire to have a stable branch (eg, significant changes in
main branch that may make it real unstable or incompatible, and thus you want to
retain an older branch for compatibility reasons.
But the
9 matches
Mail list logo
