incubator-adffaces-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Matthias Wessendorf" <>
Subject Re: Company-specific branches
Date Mon, 14 Aug 2006 21:55:11 GMT
I think basicly that what you want is something like:

a branch for a release or a rc, which is also maintained.

I think that's fine with Apache, why not?

In MyFaces we do a branch for *each* release too, but we are
not maintaining the branches *after* the release (which is bad).

So the work will continue on trunk and if we figure out, that there is
a bug that stopps also the *released* / *branched* version of T.,
why not apply the *patch* against the branch too.

I prefer that too.


> For some of our internal, non-open source work here at Oracle,
> we're heavily depending on Trinidad (yay!).  The catch is that,
> at certain points, we need a stable branch to build off of and
> apply only limited bug fixes so that internal work never gets
> destabilized.
> What I'd like to do is create branches in the Subversion repository
> for Trinidad code, with the following commitments:
>   - No proprietary, non-Apache code will *ever* be checked in to
>     such branches.
>   - No work will happen on these branches that has not *first*
>     been checked into trunk, with the possible exception of deeply
>     hacky bug patches that wouldn't be wanted on a trunk.
> In other words, this will still be public work, and never even
> anything that could be construed as a fork in any way.
> Does this seem reasonable?   Is it legit by Apache rules?
> All the alternatives I can think of are even less legit - e.g., we
> could make an internal copy of the source code, but that just
> reduces our exposure to the internal work and makes it less
> straightforward for us to hew to the true code on the trunk.
> -- Adam

Matthias Wessendorf

further stuff:
mail: mwessendorf-at-gmail-dot-com

View raw message