Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-servicemix-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 4069 invoked from network); 29 Feb 2008 16:13:12 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (140.211.11.2) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 29 Feb 2008 16:13:12 -0000 Received: (qmail 41675 invoked by uid 500); 29 Feb 2008 16:13:07 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-servicemix-dev-archive@servicemix.apache.org Received: (qmail 41660 invoked by uid 500); 29 Feb 2008 16:13:07 -0000 Mailing-List: contact dev-help@servicemix.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: dev@servicemix.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list dev@servicemix.apache.org Received: (qmail 41649 invoked by uid 99); 29 Feb 2008 16:13:07 -0000 Received: from nike.apache.org (HELO nike.apache.org) (192.87.106.230) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Fri, 29 Feb 2008 08:13:07 -0800 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.0 required=10.0 tests=SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: domain of bruce.snyder@gmail.com designates 209.85.200.168 as permitted sender) Received: from [209.85.200.168] (HELO wf-out-1314.google.com) (209.85.200.168) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Fri, 29 Feb 2008 16:12:18 +0000 Received: by wf-out-1314.google.com with SMTP id 25so3577133wfc.27 for ; Fri, 29 Feb 2008 08:12:38 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; bh=gwYGtZOzZVSB0rUNbrwkxmFPyzMnNgf3Yum89gzqEQo=; b=jxhRdCiU1KQxy9vYc7gTLJCq9PysTPfWFsqz0UCt9p9/sby8A/roPopEpP64Y35CDnKRDctZutlQ/e50xZNZYramch337vBYO+flFbcV9rnsjzArWGqY2uIrOwIpc5HvCcKrN3CuU5swXQPy3+ZMoKlrcVt63eMzKKGTvQ5c540= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=SCRRnYE7YglkU/DeXm2BhyufktUtfR1/NYlJ8iDoKHG9+PLktDOG9eEy0V91TikD9f2d8Coy4QkI2CFusccpHnnlfVtJHmXyBCaHbdZzUEEDCCo9nKNIHXMRc6MWbIwIYSf4NPSOT+4/5cbzcotAqFWJezUIF4OvgoTtd8GQAIk= Received: by 10.143.162.8 with SMTP id p8mr7158206wfo.49.1204301558151; Fri, 29 Feb 2008 08:12:38 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.142.229.19 with HTTP; Fri, 29 Feb 2008 08:12:38 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <7b3355cb0802290812m32513684vdca28ccb347ff0e9@mail.gmail.com> Date: Fri, 29 Feb 2008 09:12:38 -0700 From: "Bruce Snyder" To: dev@servicemix.apache.org Subject: Re: How to handle branches wrt new features In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <200802291617.42862.lars.heinemann@compart.net> X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org On Fri, Feb 29, 2008 at 8:26 AM, Guillaume Nodet wrote: > I've no clear idea if we should remove it or keep it in the branch. > This is a bit of a edge case as there is really no chances to introduce > bugs on existing components. I think we need to reach a consensus > here, so that we can reach some kind of policy around that. > > My personal opinion would be to only include it in trunk ... Agreed. New features should only go into the trunk. Only bug fixes should go into a branch unless there's good reason to do differently. > .. and don't be sorry, there's no problems, mainly because we have > never really discussed that. Yep, we've not set up a policy yet, so it's not a problem. But it seems like we should establish one since we've got a few new committers. Bruce -- perl -e 'print unpack("u30","D0G)U8V4\@4VYY9&5R\"F)R=6-E+G-N>61E