On 8/8/12 7:03 PM, "Omar Gonzalez" <omarg.develo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 7:00 PM, Justin Mclean <jus...@classsoftware.com>wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>>> It would be more like option two, the always branch system. Features,
>>> fixes, releases, are always done off branches.
>> I would not be against that, I don't like the overhead and complexity it
>> brings compared to working in trunk, but it doesn't have the issues that a
>> single unstable branch does. So I assume you changed your mind re
>> supporting option 1?
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Justin
>
>
> I would say yes, this would be my first choice. I think it would help
> manage the amount of chaos that happens and will help maintain a clean
> trunk.
>
> My ultimate first choice would be to get this project on Git. :)
Maybe I'm missing something, but my read of the article was that the
"develop" branch was the same as "unstable" and is even more restrictive
about checkins to trunk than I was thinking. It just seems to want to use
even more branching. How does that make things better?
--
Alex Harui
Flex SDK Team
Adobe Systems, Inc.
http://blogs.adobe.com/aharui
