On Sat, Jun 30, 2012 at 2:09 AM, Michael Bedward
<[email protected]>wrote:
> On 30 June 2012 16:47, Andrea Aime <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > Master wise, if we want to release a milestone, we just tag the master?
> > However this will require a "out of the pool"
> > period, even if a small one.
>
> My reading of Justin's proposed scheme was that milestones would never
> be coming from the master branch, and that this would impose a well
> defined structure on how versions of any kind are issued. But given
> your question I wonder if I'm missing something ?
Yes, this is what i am implying. Basically we would never cut a release
from master, there would always have to be a stable/primary branch cut in
order to do a milestone. Which does diverge from the pending timeboxed
release model which does involve cutting releases from trunk/master.
>
> > Assuming we have automation I guess another possible way is to have the
> > script make the changes
> > on the stable branch, commit, then commit a revert of those, and then tag
> > the specific revision number
> > that had the version number changes as the release... convoluted enough?
> :-p
> >
>
> Won't the separate release branches be a lot easier than that ? Or is
> there some cost to maintaining them ?
>
> Michael
>
--
Justin Deoliveira
OpenGeo - http://opengeo.org
Enterprise support for open source geospatial.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Live Security Virtual Conference
Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and
threat landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. Discussions
will include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in malware
threats. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/
_______________________________________________
GeoTools-Devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/geotools-devel
