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 D8B81DB97 for ; Wed, 8 Aug 2012 18:37:16 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 1467 invoked by uid 500); 8 Aug 2012 18:37:16 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-incubator-flex-dev-archive@incubator.apache.org Received: (qmail 1418 invoked by uid 500); 8 Aug 2012 18:37:16 -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 1409 invoked by uid 99); 8 Aug 2012 18:37:16 -0000 Received: from nike.apache.org (HELO nike.apache.org) (192.87.106.230) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 08 Aug 2012 18:37:16 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.0 required=5.0 tests=SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: local policy) Received: from [66.167.159.180] (HELO mail.digitalprimates.net) (66.167.159.180) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 08 Aug 2012 18:37:08 +0000 Received: from DPSBS1.digitalprimates.local ([fe80::5823:d1b4:86c2:3ad0]) by DPSBS1.digitalprimates.local ([fe80::5823:d1b4:86c2:3ad0%22]) with mapi id 14.01.0289.001; Wed, 8 Aug 2012 13:36:45 -0500 From: "Michael A. Labriola" To: "flex-dev@incubator.apache.org" Subject: RE: SVN and issues with branching / consider how we use SVN going forward Thread-Topic: SVN and issues with branching / consider how we use SVN going forward Thread-Index: AQHNdEtPdbTjzeEA70iDrxqHXEdxgZdOB5aAgAA6lACAABThAIAAcYAAgAAL9ICAAALCgIAAcOeAgAAM3ACAAGSIgIAAF8eAgAABSACAAAciAIAAPt0wgAALVhKAABvMkA== Date: Wed, 8 Aug 2012 18:36:44 +0000 Message-ID: References: In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [192.168.254.54] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 >Interesting read. Are you also pushing to make Git the default SCM? > >I'm not sure how far away we are from this model in some respects. We hav= e whiteboards which sort of decentralize new development, and I am proposin= g an "unstable" branch that maps to the "develop" >branch in the article (a= nd "master" is "trunk"). > >I don't know that I'd go with release branches if we can get enough folks = to pound on the promotions from unstable to trunk when they go in. > >And to answer Justin's question, merging by revision number worked pretty = well for us. But yes, every once in a while you will hit merge-hell. I'm = just saying it is worth it in order to protect the integrity of trunk. If it's possible, yes, I really do think Git would help. The reason is that= dealing with merge issues in Git are infinitely easier and, at least 95% o= f the time, keeps us out of the merge-hell that I think Justin legitimately= fears. The one nice thing about the release and feature branches is that it allows= people to start working toward future releases and grand visions while a c= urrent release is being stabilized. For example the code many had in whiteb= oards that was destined for future releases. Mike