Sorry Phil, I'm not sure I understand you, you
said 'No' first, but here you seem to agree with
my same, but more detailed proposal (also agreed
on by those commenting).
Can we move forward into this direction?
Brgds,
Viktor
On 2008.06.24., at 14:16, Phil Barnett wrote:
On Tuesday 24 June 2008 04:29:09 am Szakáts Viktor wrote:
Do you agree with such a branch layout and versioning?:
+ harbour - commit all new developments
|-+ harbour-1.0 - commit 1.0 fixes only ("1.0dev")
| +-- harbour-1.0.0RCn - read-only for RC release
| +-- harbour-1.0.n - read-only for final release
|
|-+ harbour-1.1 - commit 1.1 fixes only
| +-- harbour-1.1.0bn - read-only for beta release
| +-- harbour-1.1.0RCn - read-only for RC release
| +-- harbour-1.1.n - read-only for final release
|
|-+ harbour-2.0 - commit 2.0 fixes only
| +-- harbour-2.0.0bn - read-only for beta release
| +-- harbour-2.0.0RCn - read-only for RC release
| +-- harbour-2.0.n - read-only for final release
| ...
...
To emphases all that in the SVN tree, I propose this
layout:
main branch:
/trunk/harbour (what we have)
bugfix branches:
/branches/harbour-1.0
/branches/harbour-1.1
/branches/harbour-2.0
read-only "tags":
/tags/harbour-1.0.0RCn
/tags/harbour-1.1.0bn
/tags/harbour-1.1.0RCn
/tags/harbour-2.0.0bn
/tags/harbour-2.0.0RCn
(we already have all the old CVS "tags" here)
Opinions? Phil?
This looks sane.
--
Waiting for sunspots.
_______________________________________________
Harbour mailing list
Harbour@harbour-project.org
http://lists.harbour-project.org/mailman/listinfo/harbour
_______________________________________________
Harbour mailing list
Harbour@harbour-project.org
http://lists.harbour-project.org/mailman/listinfo/harbour
