-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
On 27 Nov 2006, at 11:53, yuppie wrote:
I don't think this is a legitimate switch: GS 1.2 is *much*
terms of release management, than CMF 1.6, and introduces new
Currently GenericSetup 1.2 is the only version with a maintenance
branch. CMF-1.6.1-final was tagged *after* GenericSetup 1.1, so an
additional 1.1 maintenance branch would not help us. Therefore
using GenericSetup 1.2 in CMF 1.6 might be the best solution.
What I really don't like are externals that point to the *HEAD* of
a branch. Instead of moving targets we should use revision numbers.
(It might make sense to make an exception for CMF trunk.)
I'm happy with any policy that we can agree on. Right now there's
none, and that leads to confusion.
I'd suggest a policy where a CMF maintenance branch points to the
head of a GS maintenance branch, and when a CMF version is tagged its
external is "frozen" at that particluar SVN revision for GS. There's
no need to make a GS tag for a CMF release I think.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (Darwin)
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Zope-CMF maillist - Zope-CMF@lists.zope.org
See http://collector.zope.org/CMF for bug reports and feature requests