Branching (as I've stated a couple of time now) is an issue, which I feel can and should be automated. However, the merging of code is something that I feel should be left with manual intervention.
Some bugs that have been fixed in a branch, may have been solved in the head already by e.g. implementing a new feature (maybe you stumbled upon the bug or you had to refactor some code and fixed the bug without knowing). So, in my opinion, the merging must remain a manual process. However, don't let me keep you from exploring things that might help you in your development-process! Keep turning the issue around, and maybe you even find a solution that makes me change my mind! ;-) On Friday 27 April 2007 12:23, Heinrich Nirschl wrote: > There is another, slightly related issue. From time to time, you want > to merge the bug fixes from the maintenance branch back to the trunk. > The problem is, that you get merge conflicts on all the POMs because > of the version fields that have changed on the trunk and on the > maintenance branch. This makes again some manual intervention > necessary. I don't have a good solution for that either. Ideas are > welcome. > > I think part of the problem with branching and merging is that even if > you keep all the module versions in sync you have the version > information literally written in every POM in your project (as version > of the artifact or as version of the parent POM). It would be much > less painful if there was just one place to adapt. However, I don't > see how a central specification of the version could be achieved > without loosing the ability to build modules individually. > > - Henry -- Roland Asmann CFC Informationssysteme Entwicklungsgesellschaft m.b.H Bäckerstrasse 1/2/7 A-1010 Wien FN 266155f, Handelsgericht Wien Tel.: +43/1/513 88 77 - 27 Fax.: +43/1/513 88 62 Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Web: www.cfc.at --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
