Am Donnerstag, 15. Juni 2006 13:39 schrieb Peter Kümmel: > I think the only branches I have to care about is my own and trunk. > And when a update someone other branch it is just niceness to the > owner of this branch, because he is responsible for his branch.
I agree 100%. My point however is that for all branches that are intended to be merged back in the future there should always be exactly one "base revision". This "base revision" marks the branchpoint: If you want to get the real changes in the branch you have to compare it to the trunk at the "base revision". All subsequent changes in trunk need to be merged to the branch. So if you want to be nice, merge everything up to the revision of your changes. Otherwise, don't merge anything. > I also think when I use some else branch and get problems then it is > my problem, because as I understand it, in my branch I could do all > what I want to, and don't have to care about the rest of the world, > because of this it is a personal branch. (But maybe I'm wrong here.) That is my understanding, too. > And when someone plan to merge his branch with trunk then it is his > job to update his branch, he could ask for help, but finally he > is responsible for updating his branch. I agree too, but you will make this unnecessary difficult if you just merge random changes. Georg
