Am 07/01/2011 05:23 PM, schrieb Alexandro Colorado:
On Fri, Jul 1, 2011 at 10:20 AM, Alexandro Coloradowrote:
On Fri, Jul 1, 2011 at 10:13 AM, Marcus (OOo)wrote:
Am 07/01/2011 04:56 PM, schrieb Alexandro Colorado:
On Fri, Jul 1, 2011 at 9:46 AM, Marcus (OOo)
wrote:
Am 06/30/2011 04:03 AM
On Fri, Jul 1, 2011 at 10:20 AM, Alexandro Colorado wrote:
>
>
> On Fri, Jul 1, 2011 at 10:13 AM, Marcus (OOo) wrote:
>
>> Am 07/01/2011 04:56 PM, schrieb Alexandro Colorado:
>>
>> On Fri, Jul 1, 2011 at 9:46 AM, Marcus (OOo)
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Am 06/30/2011 04:03 AM, schrieb Alexandro Colorado
On Fri, Jul 1, 2011 at 10:13 AM, Marcus (OOo) wrote:
> Am 07/01/2011 04:56 PM, schrieb Alexandro Colorado:
>
> On Fri, Jul 1, 2011 at 9:46 AM, Marcus (OOo)
>> wrote:
>>
>> Am 06/30/2011 04:03 AM, schrieb Alexandro Colorado:
>>>
>>> On Wed, Jun 29, 2011 at 8:33 AM, Marcus (OOo)
>>>
wrote
Am 07/01/2011 04:56 PM, schrieb Alexandro Colorado:
On Fri, Jul 1, 2011 at 9:46 AM, Marcus (OOo) wrote:
Am 06/30/2011 04:03 AM, schrieb Alexandro Colorado:
On Wed, Jun 29, 2011 at 8:33 AM, Marcus (OOo)
wrote:
Sorry, it seems I wasn't clear enough.
I don't think about how to name dir
On Fri, Jul 1, 2011 at 9:46 AM, Marcus (OOo) wrote:
> Am 06/30/2011 04:03 AM, schrieb Alexandro Colorado:
>
> On Wed, Jun 29, 2011 at 8:33 AM, Marcus (OOo)
>> wrote:
>>
>> Sorry, it seems I wasn't clear enough.
>>>
>>> I don't think about how to name directories and files in the SVN repo
>>> i
Am 06/30/2011 04:03 AM, schrieb Alexandro Colorado:
On Wed, Jun 29, 2011 at 8:33 AM, Marcus (OOo) wrote:
Sorry, it seems I wasn't clear enough.
I don't think about how to name directories and files in the SVN repo
itself. Sure we can stick with the schema like it is done in other projects.
It
On Wed, Jun 29, 2011 at 8:33 AM, Marcus (OOo) wrote:
> Sorry, it seems I wasn't clear enough.
>
> I don't think about how to name directories and files in the SVN repo
> itself. Sure we can stick with the schema like it is done in other projects.
> It's more a general thing how to present trunk a
On Wed, Jun 29, 2011 at 8:45 AM, Greg Stein wrote:
> Yes, very much clearer. Thanks!
>
> Whatever ever we decide on the name, it will be "Apache $something". We
> know
> that much, but I don't think the community has (yet) tried to figure out
> what $something should be. OpenOffice? OpenOffice.or
On 06/29/2011 03:54 PM, Marcus (OOo) wrote:
Am 06/29/2011 03:39 PM, schrieb Michael Stahl:
On 29.06.2011 15:03, Greg Stein wrote:
Branches can be named whatever we'd like. My own preference would be
to call this: /branches/3.4.x
The "OOO" is awfully redundant, and the last digit ("0") doesn't
On Wed, Jun 29, 2011 at 10:06, Marcus (OOo) wrote:
> Am 06/29/2011 03:45 PM, schrieb Greg Stein:
>>
>> Yes, very much clearer. Thanks!
>
> :-)
>
>> Whatever ever we decide on the name, it will be "Apache $something". We
>> know
>> that much, but I don't think the community has (yet) tried to figur
Am 06/29/2011 03:45 PM, schrieb Greg Stein:
Yes, very much clearer. Thanks!
:-)
Whatever ever we decide on the name, it will be "Apache $something". We know
that much, but I don't think the community has (yet) tried to figure out
what $something should be. OpenOffice? OpenOffice.org? Office?
Am 06/29/2011 03:39 PM, schrieb Michael Stahl:
On 29.06.2011 15:03, Greg Stein wrote:
Branches can be named whatever we'd like. My own preference would be
to call this: /branches/3.4.x
The "OOO" is awfully redundant, and the last digit ("0") doesn't make
sense since we would be releasing patche
On Jun 29, 2011 9:40 AM, "Michael Stahl" wrote:
>
> On 29.06.2011 15:03, Greg Stein wrote:
>>
>> Branches can be named whatever we'd like. My own preference would be
>> to call this: /branches/3.4.x
>>
>> The "OOO" is awfully redundant, and the last digit ("0") doesn't make
>> sense since we would
Yes, very much clearer. Thanks!
Whatever ever we decide on the name, it will be "Apache $something". We know
that much, but I don't think the community has (yet) tried to figure out
what $something should be. OpenOffice? OpenOffice.org? Office? ... or
something entirely new like Apache Alfred.
>F
On 29.06.2011 15:03, Greg Stein wrote:
Branches can be named whatever we'd like. My own preference would be
to call this: /branches/3.4.x
The "OOO" is awfully redundant, and the last digit ("0") doesn't make
sense since we would be releasing patches from the branch such as
3.4.1. The "3.4.x" nam
Sorry, it seems I wasn't clear enough.
I don't think about how to name directories and files in the SVN repo
itself. Sure we can stick with the schema like it is done in other
projects. It's more a general thing how to present trunk and branches to
the outside.
E.g., when we release bits we
On Wed, Jun 29, 2011 at 08:09, Marcus (OOo) wrote:
> With the discussions about the master and feature branches, the following
> question comes to my mind.
>
> What about this naming schema for master and feature branches? *)
>
> In the past we had the following:
>
> DEV300 = master/trunk/head
> T
With the discussions about the master and feature branches, the
following question comes to my mind.
What about this naming schema for master and feature branches? *)
In the past we had the following:
DEV300 = master/trunk/head
This will never lead to a release
OOO340 = branch
Branched from a
18 matches
Mail list logo
