On Fri, May 27, 2005 at 06:33:49PM -0400, Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote: > > On May 27, 2005, at 4:25 PM, David Blevins wrote: > > >Yea, I was just about to post that. Stable/unstable refers to > >branches. > > > > But jeremy is right here (but forgot to say it) - because we're using > SVN, you want to keep the branches in a separate root so that > > svn co geronimo > > doesn't bring down every branch, but just gets you the current head. > > As long as we're in the same SVN repo, the fact that we have > different roots is irrelevant from the POV of making copies (aka > "branching"), but it's a big help for users.
Yea, I get that. But I think Jeremy is proposing more of this: ../repos/asf/geronimo/transaction/unstable ../repos/asf/geronimo/transaction/stable than this: ../repos/asf/geronimo/unstable/modules/transaction ../repos/asf/geronimo/stable/modules/transaction Jeremy? -David > > geir > > >-David > > > >On Fri, May 27, 2005 at 12:18:03PM -0400, Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote: > > > >>Clearly, we need something like this to get organized around the > >>final push for certification and the 1.0 release, by why not just > >>branch for the stable, and head is unstable? > >> > >>geir > >> > >>On May 27, 2005, at 12:07 PM, Jeremy Boynes wrote: > >> > >> > >>>Stefan brings up the question of whether we want to release sub- > >>>modules of Geronimo separately. I think this is a good idea and > >>>would propose the following restructure of the tree to move in this > >>>direction. > >>> > >>>Rather than "trunk" in the root, we have three separate trees: > >>> > >>>stable similar to even-numbered versions of Linux, this tree > >>> would contain stable code intended for production use > >>> and operates with a focus on stability (i.e. well > >>> documented stable APIs, backward compatibility, no > >>> SNAPSHOT dependencies etc.) > >>> There will be multiple branches as needed. > >>> > >>>unstable similar to odd-numbered versions this is where new > >>> development is done and APIs etc. are much more > >>> likely to change. We may still do releases from here > >>> but they are quite likely to be incompatible; it may > >>> be all we package from here are nightlies. > >>> > >>>sandbox as now, a free-for-all area for trying out new ideas > >>> and experimenting with new technologies > >>> > >>>Given the size of the codebase, we need to preserve the module > >>>structure that we have in the current trunk. However, even now some > >>>modules are more stable than others (e.g. the transaction and > >>>connector ones Thierry is looking to use) and I think are in a > >>>position where they can be versioned separately. > >>> > >>>With the structure above in place, we can move modules into the > >>>stable or unstable trees as appropriate. For those that we consider > >>>stable (e.g. transaction) we can cut numbered releases that people > >>>can use standalone. > >>> > >>>This will also speed the unstable build as we won't need to check > >>>SNAPSHOTs for everything all the time. > >>> > >>>I would suggest we start on this as part of packaging for M4 and > >>>would be willing to co-ordinate. > >>> > >>>-- > >>>Jeremy > >>> > >>> > >>> > >> > >>-- > >>Geir Magnusson Jr +1-203-665-6437 > >>[EMAIL PROTECTED] > >> > >> > > > > > > -- > Geir Magnusson Jr +1-203-665-6437 > [EMAIL PROTECTED] >
