Right. The problem with that is, when it comes time to update -j onto HEAD, that entire change will conflict if I remember rightly. I'm not exactly sure - it might not report a conflict because they are the same, but I have a feeling it does.
How we've tended to do it here is merge the branch down to HEAD first, merge the changes up to the branch, then tag the branch. That way, next update can only get the differences since that tag and it doesn't get confused. Does that sound like a good thing to do to make the branch management easier? I imagine it will probably be around for a while, and may need to be used again for a 1.0 vs 1.1 thing. - Brett > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Thursday, 14 August 2003 1:28 PM > To: Maven Developers List > Subject: RE: cvs commit: > maven/src/java/org/apache/maven/project Project.j ava > > > I merged from HEAD into the branch. Just manually using > Eclipse. I figure > that way the Branch will be closer to HEAD. > -- > dIon Gillard, Multitask Consulting > Blog: http://blogs.codehaus.org/people/dion/ > > > Brett Porter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on 14/08/2003 > 12:36:42 PM: > > > Merged them down to HEAD? Manually, or with update -j? > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > Sent: Thursday, 14 August 2003 12:33 PM > > > To: Maven Developers List > > > Subject: RE: cvs commit: > > > maven/src/java/org/apache/maven/project Project.j ava > > > > > > > > > Yep, > > > > > > I did some of that yesterday with the cactus plugin and docs. > > > -- > > > dIon Gillard, Multitask Consulting > > > Blog: http://blogs.codehaus.org/people/dion/ > > > > > > >
