db-ojb-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From oliver.m...@ppi.de
Subject RE: [CVS] how to merge fixes between main trunk and rc5 branch?
Date Thu, 18 Dec 2003 15:43:40 GMT

> -----Original Message-----

> > I disagree.  Fixes should be done in the oldest supported
> > version and than merged into the newer ones.
> > Otherwise you might unintentionally merge new source code
> > in the maintenance branch.
> > 
> > I our case that means: if there is a bug in 1.0.x and 
> > in the trunc, decide whether a fix in the 1.0.x branch 
> > is desired.  If so, fix it in that branch and than merge 
> > it into the trunc.  Otherwise, document it in the 1.0.x 
> > branch as "won't fix" and fix it in the trunc.
> From what I understand, does that mean that:

I did not mean to propose to make a distinction between
before and after 1.0 final is released.
In fact I do not see a point to do so.

> * Until 1.0 final is released
>     - Any bugs/new features are maintained in HEAD and the branch

I would prefer not to do double maintenance but use
the CVS merging facilities if at all possible.
This will be very easy as long as the 1.0.x branch and the trunc
are almost equal, and it will become harder and harder.

> * After 1.0 final is released
>     - New features and fixes for HEAD bugs are integrated into HEAD
>       and - if bugs and pertaining to 1.0 too - backported to 
> the branch

Again, I would prefer not to do backports.  At least no planned
ones.  Again: I propose to fix the bugs in the oldest release
where you would like to fix them, and then merge it into the
newer ones.  This way, the chance to succeed with an automatic
merge tools are greatest: all changes in the old versions
are fixes, whereas changes in a newer version might be ongoing

>     - Bug fixes for 1.0 are integrated into the branch and - if still
>       applicable - into HEAD
> If so, then I don't quite see a reason why the maintenance branch is
> created before the 1.0 release ? In all other respects this would be

I do consider that a good decision.  We can now start to build
features into the trunc and at the same time slowly make 1.0.x
more and more stable.


  Oliver Matz
  ppi Media GmbH
  Deliusstra├če 10
  D-24114 Kiel
  phone	+49 (0) 43 1-53 53-422
  fax     	+49 (0) 43 1-53 53-2 22
  email	mailto:oliver.matz@ppi.de
  web	www.ppi.de

Explore your printnet!

DRUPA 2004
D├╝sseldorf, Germany, 6 - 19 May 2004, Booth 6E62

To unsubscribe, e-mail: ojb-dev-unsubscribe@db.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: ojb-dev-help@db.apache.org

View raw message