On 27/2/03 11:39, "Gianugo Rabellino" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> - Create a new repository called "cocoon-2.0" and copy over the cocoon-2_0_5 >> branch of "xml-cocoon2" (clean checkout, and re-import) >> (this has been created as a part of this proposal, and it contains what >> it should. All files are down at version 1.1 in this repository) > > +1. But what happens from there on? No more branching, I assume, just > tagging as 2.0.x release happens. Right? Yessir! :-) That would be just fantastic... >> - Create a new repository called "cocoon-2.1" and copy over head from the >> main "xml-cocoon2" repository (clean checkout, and re-import) >> (this has been created as a part of this proposal, and it contains what >> it should. All files are down at version 1.1 in this repository) > > Here I'm not sure. ATM I'd rather have the latest cocoon version in a > repository such as plain "cocoon" (think CVS HEAD). In this Cocoon > lifecycle it represents 2.1. When we release 2.1, we can move this repo > to cocoon-2.1 and start using it (with tagging, no branching) for 2.1.x > releases, while "cocoon" would become the 2.2 repo. Isn't it cleaner > from a logical POV? That's a good idea... How about if we keep the module symlinked... So, "cocoon" is the current copy, which is a symlink to whatever is the current version "cocoon-2.1" now, "cocoon-2.2" "cocoon-3.0" and so on in the future... Pier