Danek Duvall wrote:
- It doesn't represent how the development was actually done. This is
likely the reason I hadn't thought of it in the first place.
I understand your point here, but ... ;-)
You could make that argument for all the deltas on the build-branch.
They are often "special case" changesets which represent duplications of
changes also made someplace else, or backouts of previous changesets.
So it seems to me that an additional "merge changeset" to glue the
branch back onto the trunk is appropriate.
I think that an open branch should represent an active thread of development.
Once this active development is no longer going on, there needs to be a
way to mark the branch "dead". Either by merging it back as a "nothing done"
merge, or else somehow marking the branch explicitly as "done".
--chris
_______________________________________________
tools-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
