-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Bruce Snyder wrote, On 1/5/2006 4:26 PM: > On 1/5/06, Alan D. Cabrera <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > >>>>How do we want to stage this effort in terms of SVN organization? When >>>>should we cut a 2.0 development branch? >>> >>> >>>I suppose that the JEE 5 work would be best suited to a 2.0 branch. >>>That means that there is a potential to have to do a lot of double >>>work. What I mean to say is that any new innovations being committed >>>to the HEAD will need to be refactored and committed to the 2.0 >>>branch. And this work will increase more with the addition of more >>>branches (e.g., 1.1, 1.2, etc.). >> >>You touched on the concern that I had. I'm thinking that once we cut >>this, there will be no further work on 1.x, because everyone will want >>to work on 2.x. > > > Then we should probably consider making a decision that the HEAD > should contain 2.x work only. If any fixes need to be done to the 1.x > code then proper branching and tagging should occur to facilitate that > work.
Good point. What do others think? Regards, Alan -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (MingW32) Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFDvbmY1xC6qnMLUpYRAsEZAJ4hKUKXBCTxkTQfPMXGOr3w1LswAQCbBtpt 0ThTQUdCzTdCaaapV71OgZ8= =L4zh -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
