apr-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Garrett Rooney <roo...@electricjellyfish.net>
Subject Re: Backport and release policy for APR and APR-UTIL...
Date Thu, 16 Dec 2004 00:06:27 GMT
Brad Nicholes wrote:
>   I stand corrected on versioning.  This was actually some of the
> information that I was looking for and just missed somehow.  But I think
> that this brings up another issue that I am still confused about.  
> 
>   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
> 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
> 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?

At the time I suspect it wasn't known if trunk would be progressing 
towards 2.x or not.  If we decide that the trunk is moving that way (and 
I don't think anyone has checked in any changes that couldn't go in 
1.1.x yet, although I could be wrong) we can just branch 1.x from the 
revision immediately prior to those changes going in.  You can branch 
from any revision you want in Subversion, it doesn't have to be from HEAD.

-garrett

Mime
View raw message