on 5/14/02 10:48 AM, "Erik Hatcher" <lists@ehatchersolutions.com> wrote:
> Just out of curiosity, why aren't you branching in CVS so that you don't
> have to freeze development (not that there are a lot of commits, but...).
>
> I'm no CVS management expert, but on the ant-dev team we branched Ant 1.5
> and bug fixes get committed to that branch, and development continues on
> HEAD. We will at some point merge the bug fixes back into the HEAD line.
>
> Erik
You should not branch CVS on a RC release.
You tag on a RC and you branch on a final release if you think that you are
going to continue on that branch while adding new functionality to HEAD.
What I suggest is that you first tag the release and then decide later if
you want to branch based on the development styles (you can go back and make
a branch from a tag).
Ant tends to have more random/unstable development than Lucene which makes
it more of a candidate for branching.
All in all, branches with CVS are a pain in the ass. Try to avoid them.
-jon
(who works with Karl Fogel)
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:lucene-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:lucene-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org>
|