Re: Re: [dev] Mercurial-Implementation: OOo domain developer public keys

Hi Heiner,

I think

http://martinsantics.blogspot.com/2009/05/feature-branches-vs-release-branches.html

is a nice summary, explaining that CWS really means a 'feature branch', and 
MWS means a 'release branch'.  But:

On Friday 28 August 2009, Jens-Heiner Rechtien wrote:

> "release branch" is fine with me, but DEV300 is exactly not a "release
> branch". "Trunk" doesn't sound right as well. "development branch" might
> work.

I am not sure what is the best name in Mercurial - clearly, DEV300 is what is 
called 'master' in git, 'trunk' in SVN, or 'HEAD' in CVS.

Actually - now when I tried to search for the name of this thing in Mercurial, 
I found out that there is probably none.  'Main repository' would be probably 
the most fitting one.  Mozilla uses 'mozilla-central', but they say 'Also 
known as "Trunk"'.  So we could live with 'trunk' ;-)

And also, now I hit the problem that in the Mercurial world, 'branch' does not 
mean what is meant by the word 'branch' in the 'feature branch' and 'release 
branch' :-(  So instead, 'feature repository', and 'release repository'  
would probably match the Mercurial world...

> I tend to call a MWS nowadays a "major code line" but that's kinda ugly
> as well.
>
> For the term CWS it's even more difficult: a CWS is much more for us
> than just a "feature branch" and it might actually not contain a feature
> at all.

Both is about concept, not about actually containing a feature in the 'feature 
branch', or how 'major' the 'release branch' is ;-)

> I'm all for a more streamlined jargon, but it might be not that easy to
> find something which is precise and concise and universally
> understandably at the same time.
>
> Suggestions for a coherent nomenclature are welcome!

Well, I was thinking the git way once again, sorry :-(

But anyway, 'trunk' or 'main repository' (for DEV300), 'feature repository' 
(for OOO300, OOO310, ...),  and 'release repository' (for CWSes) sound best 
to me.

HTH,
Kendy