> 3.x ... That's the last known donation that will have SVN history. That reminds me... I don't think I've ever made it clear that Adobe's donation of Falcon will not come with any revision history. But that shouldn't be a problem because you will be seeing Falcon for the first time and its development history at Adobe is irrelevant.
- Gordon -----Original Message----- From: Alex Harui [mailto:aha...@adobe.com] Sent: Thursday, August 09, 2012 5:22 PM To: flex-dev@incubator.apache.org Subject: The Git Branching Model: Will it work with SVN? So, while the poll is leaning towards an unstable branch, there seems to be a lot of interest in the Git Branching Model described here [1]. This seems like a more complex branching scheme than I was envisioning, but it seems to be working for folks. The question is: does anyone have any concerns about how well it will work with SVN? I'm thinking we won't switch to Git until after Adobe donates 3.x at the earliest. That's the last known donation that will have SVN history. In my understanding of the model, our trunk would be the "master" described in the model and the "unstable" branch would be the "develop" branch in the model. I say that because the very top-most arrow indicates that "develop" is a branch of "master". I am thinking of running a new poll that includes this model, but I want to make sure that there isn't going to be an obvious show-stopper with SVN if it wins. I also pondered the notion of a variant where SVN trunk is the "master" and we use a Git branch as the "develop" branch. I don't know much about Git so I don't know if that would cause more problems or not, but it would allow us to keep SVN around for the 3.x import. [1] http://nvie.com/posts/a-successful-git-branching-model/ -- Alex Harui Flex SDK Team Adobe Systems, Inc. http://blogs.adobe.com/aharui
