ant-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Rob van Oostrum" <>
Subject RE: Ant 1.6
Date Tue, 23 Sep 2003 12:46:09 GMT
IMHO there's 2 possible triggers for branching off:

- it's time to run the build/release and you want to make sure you capture
the point at which this was done
- a critical piece of work that should not go into the build/release
absolutely has to go into CVS

so for practical reasons (i.e. having to double-commit a bunch of stuff) you
probably want to wait as long as possible from now on ... might even want to
consider hanging on to post-next-release patches until after the branch has
been created. On the other hand, double maintenance doesn't need to be all
that painful. Since everybody's used to using patchfiles anyway, why not
keep 2 checked out versions of Ant around (one on the branch, one on the
HEAD). Apply a patch to both and do a commit on both. I betcha it's every so
slightly quicker than the whole cvs merge thing.

just my CAD$ .02


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Antoine Lévy-Lambert []
> Sent: September 23, 2003 6:35 AM
> To: Ant Developers List
> Subject: AW: Ant 1.6


> I also think that branches add extra work, but sooner or later
> someone will
> have a new feature which can only go into 1.7 and not in 1.6. There is
> already <classloader/> which I have got to remove from the ANT_16_BRANCH.
> Cheers,
> Antoine

To unsubscribe, e-mail:
For additional commands, e-mail:

View raw message