Peter Kovacs wrote:
I hope I did not scare anyone with this lengthy explanation now.
No, but it is just off-topic. This is partially my fault since "Managing
branches" in the subject could be read as a proposal for a branching
model. But this is totally not the topic here.
The issue here is very simple and unrelated to the branching model. The
issue is: if you want a release to be named "4.1.4" you have to update
dozens of files to get it done properly, it is not a one-line change to
set "VERSION = 4.1.4" as some would expect. This is stupid, should be
scripted, caused two rebuilds of binaries in 4.1.4 due to distraction.
If we have to release 4.1.5 (not foreseen at the moment) we will want to
spend our time in actually fixing the bugs, and not in the painful
update of release numbers here and there. If we do it now, and maybe
take the occasion for scripting it, we won't risk useless delays.
This is all I wanted to say, and I hope it's clear now.
We could go on for ages discussing branching models, but the point of
this thread was actually to address the problem with actually changing
release numbers in code, nothing else.
Regards,
Andrea.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
