On Sat, 2004-12-18 at 09:46 +1100, msevior@physics.unimelb.edu.au wrote:
> > As for branching, I really hope people will fix bugs in the STABLE
> > branch and not in HEAD. Because it is a PITA to port.
> Is it easier to port bug fixes from to STABLE to hEAD than other
> way round?
It is. As I explained earlier, the idea is that anything fixed in STABLE
will end up in HEAD. But HEAD has more. So fixing bugs in STABLE means
that we can merge all the changes back to HEAD in one shot (say weekly),
instead of one by one like we did previously.
And you are not tempted to use new features for "easiness".
With the correct use of tag as explained in my long e-mail, it should be
relatively easy.
We are doing this here at the office for quite sometime and I must say
that our release cycle is so that we have a few concurrent branches, the
last released version, the currently being released version (ie all the
test QA cycle), the about start release and the HEAD. We fix the bugs
always in the older release they are supposed to be rolled in, and we
merge periodically.
It is easy to have 2 trees for 2 different branches. I have been doing
that since 1.0 release.
Hub
-- Crazy French - http://www.figuiere.net/hub/Received on Fri Dec 17 23:57:33 2004
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Fri Dec 17 2004 - 23:57:33 CET