actually, I agree with Bernd. For the following layout:
/trunk -> 2.0 /branches/myfaces_1_1_x /branches/myfaces_1_2_x Two reasons for way making 2.0 trunk: -most current development is on-going in 2.0 (new spec) -most commits are going to the 2.0 branch (so, let's make it trunk) So, I am +1 on the above "svn layout" -Matthias On Sat, May 16, 2009 at 1:04 PM, Matthias Wessendorf <mat...@apache.org> wrote: > from Bernd, on a different thread: > > Hello, > > I would suggest following layout > > 1.1.x branch/1.1.x > 1.2.x branch/1.2.x > 2.0.x trunk > > because the 2.0.x version is in development the other branches are > only in bugfix state. > > > > > On Fri, May 15, 2009 at 1:13 PM, Werner Punz <werner.p...@gmail.com> wrote: >> Matthias Wessendorf schrieb: >>> >>> Hi, >>> ... >>>> >>>> Ok, I filed this: >>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-2053 >>>> >>>> maybe we should also think about making the JSF 1.1.x stuff a branch ... >>>> (since we already work on 2.0.x....) >>> >>> what do people think if the 1.2 stuff becomes "trunk" >>> And the following efforts are on a branch: >>> -2.0.x >>> -1.1.x >>> >> +1 >> >> > > > > -- > Matthias Wessendorf > > blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/ > sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf > twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf > -- Matthias Wessendorf blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/ sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf
