On Sep 17, 2005, at 5:34 PM, Dain Sundstrom wrote:
Geir, I sent and email about this and the feedback I got was "do it".
Yes, at 1 a.m. yesterday, and two responses. I didn't get to dev
list mail yesterday due to bringing home wife and new baby from
hospital.
Regardless, we don't want this branch, the tag contains the real M4
code so the QA branch we created for testing M4 is confusing to
users (like me).
No. Branches contain the code. The tag is a pointer to a moment in
time on a branch. Putting aside the never-ending-argument about
whether or not a security fix like M4.1 is possible due to naming
preferences, what would happen if we had a horrible security or other
problem that required us to distribute a patched release?
We would work on the branch, make a new tag, and test and release
that. I think we need to keep our branches around.
geir
-dain
On Sep 17, 2005, at 1:04 PM, Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
Didn't we decide not to do this?
We leave the branch as well, so if someone wants to evolve it and
tag, they can...
geir
On Sep 17, 2005, at 1:39 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Author: dain
Date: Sat Sep 17 10:39:10 2005
New Revision: 289835
URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewcvs?rev=289835&view=rev
Log:
This branch is old and should have been deleted a long time ago.
The official m4 code can be found in tags/v1_0_M4/
Removed:
geronimo/branches/v1_0_M4-QA/
--
Geir Magnusson Jr +1-203-665-6437
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
Geir Magnusson Jr +1-203-665-6437
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
