geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Alan D. Cabrera" <l...@toolazydogs.com>
Subject Re: Where did the 1.1 branch go?!?!
Date Thu, 15 Jun 2006 18:27:12 GMT
David Blevins wrote:
> On Jun 15, 2006, at 9:23 AM, Aaron Mulder wrote:
>
>> OK, so I see David Blevins has now created branches/1.1.1.  That still
>> wasn't what I expected.  I expect branches/1.1 to be the 1.1.x HEAD at
>> all times.  I don't expect us to continue to change it to
>> branches/1.1.1 branches/1.1.2 branches/1.1.3 etc.
>
> Preference i guess.
>
>> That has the same
>> disadvantages I originally noted, namely that if you have pending work
>> in the branch that you decide not to check in until after a release
>> then you're kind of screwed,
>
> We aren't done with 1.1 yet, so we'd still be "screwed."  ;)
>
>> and you have to re-check out the branch
>> after every dot release, and so on.
>
> Just posted the correct svn switch command on the other email.  There 
> are no technical disadvantages.
>
>> I'm thinking more like
>>
>> HEAD-----------------
>>  `branches/1.1
>>      `tags/1.1.0
>>      `tags/1.1.1
>>      `tags/1.1.2
>>  `branches/1.2
>>      `tags/1.2.0
>>      `tags/1.2.1
>>      `tags/1.2.2
>>  `branches/1.3
>>     ...
>>  `branches/2.0
>>      `tags/2.0.0
>>      `tags/2.0.1
>>      `tags/2.0.2
>> ...
>
> I've done exactly that in cvs land, it's not bad.
>
>> Is that not what others are planning on?
>>
>> Does anyone mind if I move branches/1.1.1 back to branches/1.1?
>
> The trick is we aren't done with 1.1.

Not sure why you make this statement.  Do you mean that we cannot move 
it back since people are actively working on it right now?


Regards.
Alan



Mime
View raw message