On Tue, 18 Mar 2003, Thomas Grill wrote:
Hi all
What do people think about makeing the devel_0_36 branch the main branch in CVS ?
that's an interesting question since it incorporates a few other issues:
- how does Miller handle cvs and how does he incorporate the devel branch in
his releases?
He does not :(. I do not know how many patches get sent to Miller in order to incorporate them. We talked at the ICMC about the topic, and he said that it is a lot of work to check patches for correctness, which is understandable.
Maybe the CVS helps in making this process easier, because things get tested ...
The plan up to now is to have a place to incorporate patches easily, and whenever there is a new pd version, I just merge them ...
Of course, at some point this will be unpractical without folding back patches.
My approach to solve this problem up to now was to ignore it :)
- how do we handle experimental changes in the cvs? (still other branches?)
well, up to now it was all experimental. Making this the main branch would only change things for the user (I think noone checks out the original Miller version from CVS, which is currently the main branch, because this just gets downloaded from his site directly).
If we want to do something really experimental, which would break pd for a certain time, we have to do it in a separate branch, yes.
- what about externals? i always considered my cvs contributions as
experimental (e.g. due to a compiler bug awaiting a workaround the vasp cvs version has not been functional for the last few days) but when there are built snapshots i (we?) will have to reconsider that.
This really depends on how you manage your CVS subtree. If you have some sort of stable version and experimental version in CVS we could make built snapshots with the stable version only.
If it is too much of a hassle for you having branches in there, we could do the snapshots when you say it is ready.
Greetings,
Guenter