On Mon, 2005-10-17 at 10:37 +0200, Trygve Laugstøl wrote:
> Brett Porter wrote:
> > Hi,
> > 
> > Now that 2.0 is getting close to rolling out, I wanted to open the floor
> > for discussion about how we will manage the code going forward. We have
> > a lot more freedom to do things better now that we're no longer
> > bootstrapping ourselves.
> > 
> > Here are some areas to think about:
> > - having a 2.1 trunk and 2.0.1 branch (or vice versa, or neither)
> 
> I'd prefer for 2.1 as trunk and 2.0.x as a branch.

+1

> > - whether to mark versions as -alpha, -beta along the way, or only label
> > releases at those points (for 2.1 only on this)
> 
> I like 2.1-SNAPSHOT over 2.1-alpha-SNAPSHOT.

+1

> > - ensuring plugins remain compatible with 2.0.
> > - segregation of the SVN tree to mirror our release process (some
> > thoughts in jira on this - essentially making archetypes, plugins and
> > the sandbox separate to to the main tree)
> 
> Separate trunk, tags and branches makes the most sense to me as they 
> have their own lifecycle.

+1

> > - how to manage versioning of plugins in JIRA
> 
> Separate projects like with the Maven 1 projects. Seems to have worked 
> out fine after the initial workload of setting up all the projects.

+1

Sorry for responding so late but I created an issue so that I can
capture whatever consensus we reach regarding our own dev process:

http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/MNG-1305

> --
> Trygve
> 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 
> 
-- 
jvz.

Jason van Zyl
jason at maven.org
http://maven.apache.org



---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to