- From: Terje Bless <link@pobox.com>
- Date: Sat, 10 Apr 2004 23:25:40 +0200
- To: olivier Thereaux <ot@w3.org>
- Cc: QA Dev <public-qa-dev@w3.org>
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 olivier Thereaux <ot@w3.org> wrote: >[[ ACTION - Terje to Document current and planned CVS Branch layout ]] Ok, here goes... :-) There are currently two main branches in CVS; HEAD and validator-0_6_0-branch. «validator-0_6_0-branch» is misnamed; it's really «…-0_6-branch». On this branch is 0.6.0, 0.6.1, 0.6.2, and 0.6.5 (including betas); and each of them has a tag corresponding with the version or release number. HEAD has no (relevant) tags. The status of «validator-0_6_0-branch» is as we've discussed; it needs some work to be releaseable, but is otherwise in fairly good shape. HEAD is in a semi-working state, including major new feature work (Templates chief among them), but rather far diverged from …-0_6_0-branch and merging them is going to be a bit of a pain. The immediate plan once 0.6.5 is out, is to merge 0.6.5 back onto HEAD and then feature-freeze the …-0_6_0-branch. That is, _only_ absolutely critical bugfixes — of the type that are then imediately `cvs up`ed on v.w3.org — should go in after the merge. Once 0.6.5 and HEAD have been merged, I'm thinking we immediately branch «validator-0_7-branch». This branch starts out beeing feature-frozen (unlike 0.6.0 did), with only stabilization work getting done. New features that are well contained and stable get added on HEAD, and the 0.7.0 branch gets merged back onto the trunk regularly. The intent is that once 0.7.0 gets released we can, if we have enough new features yet, immediately branch HEAD into a (feature-frozen) 0.8 branch and repeat the process. That way, HEAD is always in a more or less runnable state (roughly alpha quality) and it never gets too far diverged from the current release train branch. Any major and destabilizing work gets done on its own branch; the existing Template work and the future modularization work beeing prime candidates. For these branches, whoever makes the branch is responsible for keeping it in sync with HEAD. Merges happen from HEAD to branch — instead of the other way around — until the new feature work is ready to be merged back onto HEAD and integrated into the next version released. A quick illustration is at <http://qa-dev.w3.org/wmvs/wmv-cvs-branches.png>; no specific relation to current devel plans, just meant to illustrate the setup I'm talking about. :-) Comments? - -- > ...publicity rights, moral rights, and rights against unfair competition... Well, you've got me there. I have no idea what any of those have to do with SGML. Next you'll be claiming that running NSGMLS constitutes an unauthorized public performance of SGML. -- Richard Tobin -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: PGP SDK 3.0.3 iQA/AwUBQHhmUqPyPrIkdfXsEQKCbgCfYiwEHvYNxgDcHNbfpAhsf7fDcIAAoMCg GHPeqGVbfIjW22ezx1GgbJyE =tGkk -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Received on Saturday, 10 April 2004 17:25:58 UTC