Pierre Joye wrote:
It seems to have a confusion between forks used for development by
individuals and (so called) official branches.
Looking back, the point that I was not explaining very well was the fact that
people seem to think that they need to create a fork into their on-line account
before cloning to the local copy. On the whole these are not needed, and the
'sandbox' approach for sharing tangential work seems better? Similarly
extensions like apt have their own subrepo which can be worked on independent to
the bulk of the code base?
About branching, tagging or developing using a DVCS, I can only
recommend to read the doc linked in this rfc:
http://nvie.com/posts/a-successful-git-branching-model/
It explains one model which has been proven to work pretty well.
This model is ideal for a main trunk. The major advantage to DVCS is being able
to work on things like PECL modules and even core extensions in parallel to the
main core. It is only recently that git and hg have finally supported 'subrepo'
and I see this as the ideal model for my own work. I can create a superproject
which just combines the extensions (php and third party!) that I am using and
almost manage them nicely. There are still a few rough edges to this since
neither git nor hg have been convinced that it is an important requirement ...
they don't use it themselves which seems strange when their own code base has
many third party elements? I don't see 'feature branches' as the correct way to
handle what are essentially self contained elements?
--
Lester Caine - G8HFL
-----------------------------
Contact - http://lsces.co.uk/wiki/?page=contact
L.S.Caine Electronic Services - http://lsces.co.uk
EnquirySolve - http://enquirysolve.com/
Model Engineers Digital Workshop - http://medw.co.uk//
Firebird - http://www.firebirdsql.org/index.php
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
