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 93FC6DC2A for ; Wed, 8 Aug 2012 20:24:00 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 21924 invoked by uid 500); 8 Aug 2012 20:23:59 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-incubator-flex-dev-archive@incubator.apache.org Received: (qmail 21879 invoked by uid 500); 8 Aug 2012 20:23:59 -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 21871 invoked by uid 99); 8 Aug 2012 20:23:59 -0000 Received: from athena.apache.org (HELO athena.apache.org) (140.211.11.136) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 08 Aug 2012 20:23:59 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.3 required=5.0 tests=RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: domain of aharui@adobe.com designates 64.18.1.33 as permitted sender) Received: from [64.18.1.33] (HELO exprod6og114.obsmtp.com) (64.18.1.33) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 08 Aug 2012 20:23:53 +0000 Received: from outbound-smtp-2.corp.adobe.com ([193.104.215.16]) by exprod6ob114.postini.com ([64.18.5.12]) with SMTP ID DSNKUCLKxHND8d/q3NNgYSi1caEQfrr5fcBA@postini.com; Wed, 08 Aug 2012 13:23:32 PDT Received: from inner-relay-4.eur.adobe.com (inner-relay-4b [10.128.4.237]) by outbound-smtp-2.corp.adobe.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id q78KNV8N007681 for ; Wed, 8 Aug 2012 13:23:31 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nacas01.corp.adobe.com (nacas01.corp.adobe.com [10.8.189.99]) by inner-relay-4.eur.adobe.com (8.12.10/8.12.9) with ESMTP id q78KNPYt008814 for ; Wed, 8 Aug 2012 13:23:30 -0700 (PDT) Received: from NAMBX02.corp.adobe.com ([10.8.127.96]) by nacas01.corp.adobe.com ([10.8.189.99]) with mapi; Wed, 8 Aug 2012 13:23:25 -0700 From: Alex Harui To: "flex-dev@incubator.apache.org" Date: Wed, 8 Aug 2012 13:23:24 -0700 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: AQHNdEtPdbTjzeEA70iDrxqHXEdxgZdOB5aAgAA6lACAABThAIAAcYAAgAAL9ICAAALCgIAAcOeAgAAM3ACAAGSIgIAAF8eAgAABSACAAAciAIAAPt0wgAALVhKAABvMkIAAHv+6 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: user-agent: Microsoft-Entourage/13.11.0.110726 acceptlanguage: en-US Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org On 8/8/12 11:36 AM, "labriola@digitalprimates.net" wrote: >=20 > The one nice thing about the release and feature branches is that it allo= ws > people to start working toward future releases and grand visions while a > current release is being stabilized. For example the code many had in > whiteboards that was destined for future releases. >=20 > Mike >=20 The author of the article seemed to want to make a release branch so that whatever hits the trunk is essentially a snapshot of a release. I'm not quite sure that is worth it if at the point there is a group of us dedicate= d to making a release and fixing things that are broken. I wasn't thinking we'd need to restrict checkins to unstable around release time if we are being selective about what changes get promoted to trunk. But if that doesn't work out, then we would probably need to have release branches. Feature branches are certainly ok in anyone's whiteboard or in branches, bu= t I don't know if we need policy around it. --=20 Alex Harui Flex SDK Team Adobe Systems, Inc. http://blogs.adobe.com/aharui