--- Steve Downey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Vincent Massol [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Tuesday, April 24, 2001 3:39 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: [DIGEST] April 22, 2001
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Craig R. McClanahan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Monday, April 23, 2001 11:47 PM
> Subject: Re: [DIGEST] April 22, 2001
>
>
> >
> >
> > On Tue, 24 Apr 2001, Peter Donald wrote:
> >
> > > At 02:15 23/4/01 -0700, Morgan Delagrange
> wrote:
> >
> > One technical note that affects both Commons and
> Taglibs is the fact that
> > CVS branches are global to an entire repository.
> Therefore, if one taglib
> > (or Commons package) creates a branch "rel2", then
> nobody else can use
> > that name. We might want to think a little more
> about the long term
> > impacts of this little detail.
> >
>
> Why don't we adopt the convention : <component
> name>_REL_<release version> ?
>
> For example, for version 1.1 of cactus that would be
> : CACTUS_REL_11
>
> So that there will be no name conflict with other
> components.
>
> > Craig
> >
> Vincent
>
> Please remember that you need a tag for the branch
> AND the release. Every
> release is also a branch point, for bug fixes to
> that release. Even minor
> releases. For example, if you discover a security
> bug in release 1.3, you
> need to get 1.3.1 out. Even if work has proceeded to
> 1.4.
I don't know if it's practical to perform maintenance
on minor releases that have been supplanted by other
minor releases. If you look at the definition of a
minor release, it is a release that contains new
features but maintains backward compatibility.
Therefore, it should be possible for users to simply
grab the latest bug fix for their major release
without having to change their code.
For example, if a bug is discovered that affects
releases 1.2, 1.3, and 1.4, then a bug fix 1.4.1
should suffice for all those users. The alternative
is to release 1.2.1, 1.3.1 and 1.4.1 all
simultaneously. Yuck.
> CACTUS_REL_11 should be
>
> CACTUS_REL_1_1 and CACTUS_REL_1_1_BRANCH
>
> Along the 1.1 branch you might also have
> CACTUS_REL_1_1_1, CACTUS_REL_1_1_2
> and so on. CACTUS_REL_1_1_0 == CACTUS_REL_1_1, the
> initial release of Cactus
> 1.1.
>
> Main development should always be on the trunk.
> XEmacs messed this up, and
> the developers have regretted it deeply since. With
> the recent release,
> they've done some massive repository surgery so that
> the main dev branch is
> back on the trunk.
>
=====
Morgan Delagrange
Britannica.com
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Auctions - buy the things you want at great prices
http://auctions.yahoo.com/
