On Tuesday 07 October 2008 03:02:54 Peter Kjellerstedt wrote: > That said, I'm with Rob on that tagging and branching in SVN isn't > really something that's manageable. But currently we are stuck > with SVN...
I'm all for tagging. Putting a label on a specific version we cut a release from is fine with me. (I used to record the svn commit numbers of each release in a text file, but having it in the repository makes sense.) It's branching off stable versions into their own little repositories as if they'll actively get new development that strikes me as counterproductive. If it was something like mercurial or git where synchronizing multiple branches was trivial, I wouldn't mind. But the only way to move patches from one branch to another in SVN is A) by hand, B) by making fresh commits unrelated to the other branch. SVN is not a tool in which more having branches actually improves anything. Each SVN branch is a separate project, and uClibc has enough trouble in that regard already. Could we please not make it _worse_? Rob _______________________________________________ uClibc mailing list uClibc@uclibc.org http://busybox.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/uclibc
