apr-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Justin Erenkrantz <jus...@erenkrantz.com>
Subject Re: Backport and release policy for APR and APR-UTIL...
Date Thu, 16 Dec 2004 21:39:42 GMT
--On Wednesday, December 15, 2004 4:40 PM -0700 Brad Nicholes 
<BNICHOLES@novell.com> wrote:

>   We have already created a 1.0.x branch.  Does this mean that we are
> going to be creating a lot more short-lived branches?  I assume that

Yes.

> when we go to 1.1 we will be creating a new branch and so forth with 1.2
> etc.  I also don't see how we are separating incompatible patches from
> compatible patches if everything is going into TRUNK and there is no
> where to backport.  It seems like we should have created a 1.x branch
> rather than a 1.0.x branch and backported from TRUNK to 1.x.  The
> versioning rules don't change the fact that we don't have a way of
> moving forward with a stable release branch vs. an unstable development

No.  1.1, 1.2 can add new features but they aren't backwards-compatible - this 
is why just a 1.x branch doesn't make sense: and we may want to do maintenance 
releases of the 1.0.x branch even after 1.1.0 is out.  So, each minor version 
(1.0, 1.1, 1.2) gets its own branch.

> branch.  Even if we were going to roll 1.1 today, where would be get it
> from?  I assume TRUNK already contains patches that are meant for 2.x
> and not 1.x and since backporting to the 1.0.x branch doesn't seem to
> make sense, what do we do?  What am I missing?

As it stands, there are no 1.x incompatible changes in trunk.  If we start 
that, we'd branch 1.x and bump trunk's apr_version to 2.x.  -- justin

Mime
View raw message