Re: Re: pybloxsom (fwd)

If everyone agrees, I would like to at least prune and graft the CVS 
tree in to the method I propose. I will start out with a DEVEL branch 
so that developers and bleeding edge people would use that. I will then 
create versioned branches for 1.2 first, then 1.1 (if there is a tag 
point, so much better).

Then we will decide if we want HEAD to fall back to the PYBLOSXOM_1_2 
or we just leave it be.

On 01-Apr-05, at PM 12:14, Bill Mill wrote:

> On Mar 31, 2005 10:34 PM, Wari Wahab <[email protected]> wrote:
> <snip nice art (wink wink) from wari>
>>
>> This is just a suggestion. In practise it can be hard to follow if a
>> developer checks out a wrong branch and checks in to HEAD (there is no
>> erm.. security in cvs) so developers have to be in sync on what to do,
>> there's no way to make HEAD read-only.
>>
>> But if developers just work of DEVEL, and a release technician does 
>> the
>> dirty work of merging to HEAD and creating the necessary branches, it
>> would be a solid system to work on. Bug fixes could just check out
>> PYBLOSXOM_1_2 branch and work on fixing bugs, tags as necessary if he
>> does a release from that point (no need to merge to HEAD here).
>>
>> So what say you?
>
> The question I have is, do we have somebody to serve as the brach
> maintainer? In other words, what does Will think about this? It sounds
> like a reasonable system to me. (I even think I understood the chart).
>
> Peace
> Bill Mill
> bill.mill at gmail.com
>



-------------------------------------------------------
SF email is sponsored by - The IT Product Guide
Read honest & candid reviews on hundreds of IT Products from real users.
Discover which products truly live up to the hype. Start reading now.
http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=6595&alloc_id=14396&op=click