activemq-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Bruce Snyder" <>
Subject Re: Stable branch for ActiveMQ 4.0.x patch releases
Date Fri, 26 May 2006 17:01:39 GMT
On 5/25/06, Hiram Chirino <> wrote:
> Hi folks,
> * We Will Need  a Branch *
> Now that we are close to getting past the 4.0 release, I wanted to
> bring up the topic of how to do bug fix maintenance for it.  I think
> that the 4.0.1 release should stay focused on only including bug
> fixes.  Already, I think a few too many changes have been slipping
> into trunk which should not be in the 4.0.1 bug fix release, so trunk
> could not be used to produce the 4.0.1.  Clearly trunk is on already
> on it's way to the next 4.1 release.
> * Proposed Branch *
> I propose that we copy the 4.0 tagged release:
> to:
> and use that as our 4.0 stable branch which will produce the 4.0.n
> series of bug fix releases.
> If no body objects, I'll do create this branch early next week.
> * Bug Fix Merging?? *
> Also, we need to standardize how we will apply bug fixes to branches.
> Once we branch, when we find a bug, we will typically need to fix the
> bug in both the 4.0 and the trunk branch.  Once school of though is
> apply the bug fix to the 4.0 branch and when the 4.0.1 release is
> done, we merge all those fixes into trunk.  I'm not a big fan of that
> approach, I've seen it fail too many times.  Reasons:
>  - Bug fixes get done in trunk first usually.  Most developers I know
> prefer to work in trunk: that were the cool new shiny stuff is.
>   - Developers manually apply the fix to both the branch and the
> trunk.  This could cause a merge conflict at the time of the merge.
> They do this because either they REALLY need the fix in trunk to work
> around something or they just didn't know that we merge fixes in to
> trunk on bug fix release.
> So I'm actually a fan of informing folks that we don't do merges on
> bug fix releases and that they should manually apply their patch to
> all the branches that they think could benefit from the fix.  This has
> a little more up front work for the guy applying the patch (since he
> has to apply it to multiple branches) but I think it leads to branches
> that are more stable.

I would prefer branch stability for bug fixes and I concur with the
idea of creating branches/activemq-4.0.x from tags/activemq-4.0 and
producing the 4.0.x releases from the branch.

If you don't think we should merge bug fixes from
branches/activemq-4.0.x to the trunk, how do you propose we get bug
fixes into the next major release?

perl -e 'print unpack("u30","D0G)U8V4\@4VYY9&5R\"F)R=6-E+G-N>61E<D\!G;6%I;\"YC;VT*"

Apache Geronimo -
Apache ActiveMQ -
Apache ServiceMix -
Castor -

View raw message