> So is a branch the right way to do this if we have continued > patching on the > current, stable, release, and major development on a new version? > Should we > request a james-v3 cvs module, as Tomcat seems to use? Or is a branch > sufficient?
Branch is OK, it lets us maintain two divergent streams, assuming that one will become obsolete. The tomcat issue is more complex, AFAIK. > I would expect that we'd want to be able to easily work with either set of > code. Again, I know how I'd do this with SourceSafe, but CVS is a pretty > primitive beast (I hope that Subversion is smarter about code sharing). You can, you can check out both brances side by side and/or choose the brach of each file you are working on Branching has the added advantage of allowing merges and diffs of the file between the two (or more) versions (branch and HEAD) Forking is simpler but I don't think "root" would approve, the policy is to encourage us to maintain everything within our module, so we could conceivably move to a structure like: jakarta-james/ -james/ --2.1/ --3.0/ -/mailet --2/ --3/ but to be frank I (personally) think a branch would do. d. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
