Ersin Er wrote:
Hi,
I suggest we do not have such "giant" branches as bigbang.
This is the first time in 4 years we are working on such a branch. It
takes longer than expected, as we were supposed to have finished with it
back in february. Obviously we were too optimistic.
The idea is to close this branch as soon as the JNDI removal will be over.
I think it may prevent some developers working on the project, at
least it may make people think twice with what they are doing (in a
stressful manner).
There is always a working trunk, in which developpers can work. We are
merging from time to time trunk with bigbang, and occasionaly, we
replace trunk with bigbang (this is the third time we did it yesturday).
So for people not working on bigbang, trunk is the place, and trunk is
100% guaranted to compile (ok, 99.9% ;)
Bigbang is nothing more than a branch, all in all ...
Instead of trying to keep trunk perfectly building, we can always work
on the trunk and avoid merging problems;
I don't think that's a viable option. Some of our users are currently
maintaining some patches on their own, against trunk, just because we
are not fast enough to fix all the existing bugs, or to apply their
patches. If we can't offer at least a stable trunk to them, then we are
in trouble, IMO.
and we can sometimes (svn) tag the trunk when it perfectly builds and
makes sense as a whole. So people can be referred to those tagged
versions if they want to go with the edge version of the server.
Every single revision is a tag everyone can use to refer to a working
version. Do we need to define a Tag directory, as we have branches and
releases directories ? That could be an option, sure.
I'm truly sorry about all the problem this big refactoring is causing,
and I wish they will be fixed asap. We are really doing our best to get
rid of bigbang as fast as possible ...
Thanks !
--
--
cordialement, regards,
Emmanuel Lécharny
www.iktek.com
directory.apache.org
