robert burrell donkin ha scritto: > On 5/23/07, Stefano Bagnara <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> Experimental or dead sandboxes are not an issue to me: most of them have >> been created with the only purpose to show some ideas or to experiment >> something. > > sometimes it's easier to think about changesets > > sounds like noel has a pressing need to fix issues with his setup. > this means changing the latest release. it's better if this changeset > is available to everyone rather then the work just being done locally. > there's no need to worry about release now.
+1 As I said I always prefer to see code in svn that messages in the mailing list ;-) My only concern is about the purpose of the code: if Noel want to work on his own things and does not want to follow a shared goal then a server/sandbox/noel-v2.3-fixes is what I suggest. >> My point is that if you plan to make a release from a branch then it has >> not to diverge from trunk. > ^^^^^ > did you mean release branch? No, I meant trunk. Sorry for my not so good english, I'll try to explain. We have v2.3 branch and trunk. If you change some code in v2.3 only then you make it to diverge from trunk. If you instead change the code in trunk and then backport to v2.3 (when possible, of course) then you don't have diverging branches. We have a really small team, IMHO we can't afford multiple diversing branches. Btw I think this can be chose by active developers. As PMC member I will try to require at least one active developer for each release branch and for trunk before allowing more release branches. >> If you don't plan to release than I don't >> care at all: the more code you share in the repository in sandboxes the >> more I'm happy (I prefer to read a new java file in sandbox than most >> messages on server-dev). > > this is probably one of those occasions where it's better to think > about changesets. providing that noel uses good message or (even > better) commits a record with version numbers in the STATUS file then > it doesn't matter. when the time comes, we take a new release branch > and merge in those changesets which are wanted. > >> I think none of our current sandboxes is alive (excluding the new jcr >> experiment) and none of them is near to be merged back. > > SEDA IMAP is active Right. And as I written many times before I think you should merge everything to trunk, as you are the only active developer on this stuff. As an user asked in the list today it is difficult otherwise to understand where the current work is happening and where to look to start helping. >> FWIW I updated the STATUS file about the only sandbox I worked on. It >> would be cool if others can do the same for other sandboxes. > > +1 > > i find that version numbers work well I agree. Unfortunately here there are too many diverging ideas about what the numbers should be, so we never agreed on numbers. I will cast my preferences if someone will propose something or start a vote about this sooner or later. Stefano --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
