Return-Path: X-Original-To: apmail-incubator-flex-dev-archive@minotaur.apache.org Delivered-To: apmail-incubator-flex-dev-archive@minotaur.apache.org Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3]) by minotaur.apache.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 8CCF8DBA2 for ; Thu, 9 Aug 2012 05:26:11 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 7683 invoked by uid 500); 9 Aug 2012 05:26:10 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-incubator-flex-dev-archive@incubator.apache.org Received: (qmail 7596 invoked by uid 500); 9 Aug 2012 05:26:10 -0000 Mailing-List: contact flex-dev-help@incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: flex-dev@incubator.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list flex-dev@incubator.apache.org Received: (qmail 7577 invoked by uid 99); 9 Aug 2012 05:26:10 -0000 Received: from nike.apache.org (HELO nike.apache.org) (192.87.106.230) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Thu, 09 Aug 2012 05:26:10 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.3 required=5.0 tests=RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: domain of aharui@adobe.com designates 64.18.1.208 as permitted sender) Received: from [64.18.1.208] (HELO exprod6og107.obsmtp.com) (64.18.1.208) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Thu, 09 Aug 2012 05:26:01 +0000 Received: from outbound-smtp-1.corp.adobe.com ([192.150.11.134]) by exprod6ob107.postini.com ([64.18.5.12]) with SMTP ID DSNKUCNJ05Qwkg36c2vd531BVN+sAAPRZR1Z@postini.com; Wed, 08 Aug 2012 22:25:41 PDT Received: from inner-relay-1.corp.adobe.com ([153.32.1.51]) by outbound-smtp-1.corp.adobe.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id q795NBk0022299 for ; Wed, 8 Aug 2012 22:23:11 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nacas02.corp.adobe.com (nacas02.corp.adobe.com [10.8.189.100]) by inner-relay-1.corp.adobe.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id q795Pcvm009741 for ; Wed, 8 Aug 2012 22:25:38 -0700 (PDT) Received: from NAMBX02.corp.adobe.com ([10.8.127.96]) by nacas02.corp.adobe.com ([10.8.189.100]) with mapi; Wed, 8 Aug 2012 22:25:38 -0700 From: Alex Harui To: "flex-dev@incubator.apache.org" Date: Wed, 8 Aug 2012 22:25:37 -0700 Subject: Re: How to Merge Unstable Branch (was: [POLL] Use Unstable Branch) Thread-Topic: How to Merge Unstable Branch (was: [POLL] Use Unstable Branch) Thread-Index: Ac1100PU+sZE5v41SFexSe0xgnFOSQAHCRmr Message-ID: In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: user-agent: Microsoft-Entourage/13.11.0.110726 acceptlanguage: en-US Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 On 8/8/12 7:03 PM, "Omar Gonzalez" wrote: > On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 7:00 PM, Justin Mclean w= rote: >=20 >> Hi, >>=20 >>> It would be more like option two, the always branch system. Features, >>> fixes, releases, are always done off branches. >> I would not be against that, I don't like the overhead and complexity it >> brings compared to working in trunk, but it doesn't have the issues that= a >> single unstable branch does. So I assume you changed your mind re >> supporting option 1? >>=20 >> Thanks, >> Justin >=20 >=20 > I would say yes, this would be my first choice. I think it would help > manage the amount of chaos that happens and will help maintain a clean > trunk. >=20 > My ultimate first choice would be to get this project on Git. :) Maybe I'm missing something, but my read of the article was that the "develop" branch was the same as "unstable" and is even more restrictive about checkins to trunk than I was thinking. It just seems to want to use even more branching. How does that make things better? --=20 Alex Harui Flex SDK Team Adobe Systems, Inc. http://blogs.adobe.com/aharui