On Nov 8, 2004, at 4:22 PM, Frank Barknecht wrote:
Hallo, guenter geiger hat gesagt: // guenter geiger wrote:
On Mon, 8 Nov 2004, Frank Barknecht wrote:
I still vote for "main" in whatever combination with numbers and unspeakable letters...
I think calling a branch "main.." might lead to confusion with the main trunk. Thats why I would call it the "stable.." branch.
I don't stick to "main", "msp" would also be okay, although "main" is more appropriate IMO. But I have a slight problem with "stable". "stable" should only be used after a release. Similar to the way, Debian handles the name "stable", for *the* version to rely on, if you need reliability.
I actually like what Hans proposed in his "best practice" mail: Have "release_x" branches, and release candidates branches (which is the state, 0.38 is currently in).
Actually, the tag "release_0_38" represents the actual release, while the branch "release_0_38_patches" represents the HEAD for the patches to that release, if I understand correctly. That is the reason for the tag in addition to the branch, and also for the "_patches" part, since that branch is not the actual release, but the release plus patches.
.hc
Ciao
Frank Barknecht _ ______footils.org__
PD-dev mailing list PD-dev@iem.at http://iem.at/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pd-dev