-----Urspr�ngliche Nachricht-----
>Von: Bordet, Simone [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
>Gesendet: Montag, 18. Dezember 2000 13:53
>An: 'jBoss Developer'
>Betreff: RE: [jBoss-Dev] CVS handling and branching
>I would agree also on branching, but I found it not so simple and quite
>painful on merging, requires a lot more attention from developers since you
>can really mess things. Therefore I would not recommend it, as not everyone
>has deep CVS merging experience (me included).
You are right, branching can become a pain in the ass (and an overload for
the brain of any engaged developer) if the branches are
* too long-lasting (large devel cycles with lots and lots of features that
differ substantially from the mainline),
* too wide-spread (the probability of having conflicts between two different
branches is then much higher), or
* too interacting (e.g., branch wx needs some fixes from branch yz).
That�s why we made that restriction at infor to only introduce short
branches which stay close to the mainline and which are merged ASAP. With
that approach, merging in CVS is IMHO quite like normal update/conflict
resolution in your local working directory.
>If a group is developing
>something that will eventually finish into main trunk, then I think is
>simpler doing changes locally and discuss on the list if it is the case to
>commit it or not and where (maybe for example under contrib module).
The problem with features that fall into multiple responsiblities (such as
the planned deployer change) is that they are hard to coordinate and discuss
distributedly without actually starting to affect the repository ... and I
do not like to leave the repository inconsistent because of a preliminary
change ...
Best,
CGJ
