Sven Luther <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Wed, Nov 09, 2005 at 11:07:24AM +0900, Horms wrote: > > Yes and no. The problem is that basically we have two different things, the > first one is the build infrastructure, which should really not be all that > different for each version, and which there is really no need to have a branch > per version from. > > On the other hand, the per version configs and patches cannot be done without, > and thus should be hold in a different branch each. > > This indeed adds some complexity (rather minimal though if done right), but on > the other hand it will keep the branching to the absolute minimum, and weren't > you the one complaining about too many branches ?
Yes, though it doesn't decrease the number of branches, the number of non-infastructure branches remains the same, and additionally, we have a (sometimes branched) set of infastruture somewhere else. -- Horms -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]