Re: Common code in CVS branches

[Peter B. West]

Jeremias Maerki wrote:

Comments on your thoughts about branches: It sounds like the CVS
manipulation gets to be a project of its own. If it's too complicated,
some won't follow the rules, more work is generated for maintaining the
codebase. That's the impression I get.

It's definitely 1) more complicated, though not massively more so, and 2) requires closer liaison between committers on common code commits.

1) bad
2) good?

I can't follow you on 2). Do you mean between maintenance-oriented
committers and redesign-oriented committers? If that gets a problem then
we have a split in the project and that wouldn't be good.

Between all committers. I meant that closer liaison between committers is a good thing. All committers then have a more lively appreciation of what the others are up to.

Peter
--
Peter B. West [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.powerup.com.au/~pbwest/
"Lord, to whom shall we go?"


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