On Jan 29, 2008 7:01 AM, Rupert Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I just used 'production' system as an analogy, to get Rajith to try and > think about this. Its not the first time he has suggested deleting the > release branch.
Not sure where you got this impression from. I have no desire to delete any branch:) I just asked the questions to figure out which branch is doing what. I have a friend who is waiting for the next release of M2.x so wanted to know what the plan is. As Gordon says it is nice if we make some documentation to say what each branch corresponds to in terms of AMQP version etc. I'm not suggesting that we create branches for our internal > production needs. We will be creating branches for every Apache release > though, and it is certainly a good idea to keep them. > > Yes, M2.1 is the current 'mainline' for 0-8/0-9. > Another option is to create a branch from a tag, do the fix, tag it again and release. A lot of projects do this kinda of thing. It is equivalent to keeping the branch. However I have no preference either way. >Rajith, If you wanted to apply a bug-fix to a piece of software in > production, would you not want to apply it to the exact source that was used > to build the production system Rupert, absolutely !!! That is why I think we should use a tag (so as apply it to the exact source that was used to build the production system). Sometimes the branch may not contain the exact source. > On 29/01/2008, Gordon Sim <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > Rupert Smith wrote: > > > On 28/01/2008, Rajith Attapattu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > >> Just for my understanding, > > >> What is the difference between M2.1 and M2.1.1 ? Which branch are we > > >> planning to use for the next release of M2.x? > > > > > > Rajith, If you wanted to apply a bug-fix to a piece of software in > > > production, would you not want to apply it to the exact source that > was > > used > > > to build the production system, so as to be very careful to fix just > > that > > > bug without risking introducing bugs, or simply incompatibilities, > that > > may > > > have been created as the source evolved onwards from the point at > which > > the > > > production system was cut? > > > > Of course. However I think the question is a good one. As we have in > > effect two streams of work in the project, lets call them 0-8/0-9 and > > 0-10 to avoid confusion, which branch holds the ongoing development for > > the 0-8/0-9 stream, and will be used for the next release of that > > stream? I believe from Aidan's response that the answer is M2.1. > > > > I'm don't think it is possible to have an open branch for every > > 'production system'. The only way to ensure that only the desired fixes > > are made to a particular deployed system is to start from the exact > > source and apply locally relevant patches, then rebuild from the patched > > code. > > > > I think we would benefit from a clear policy on what we keep branches > > for and how each open branch is to be used. > > > > > -- Regards, Rajith Attapattu Red Hat blog: http://rajith.2rlabs.com/
