From: Pieter P. <pi...@jo...> - 2009-12-06 14:50:18
|
Arnold Krille wrote: > Hi, > > On Saturday 05 December 2009 17:27:33 Pieter Palmers wrote: >> I would like to propose the following strategy: >> * 2.0-ongoing is only for bug-fixes. No added functionality or >> significant rewrites. We'll regularly release 2.0.x versions from this >> if required. We try to keep the number of commits to an absolute minimum >> on this branch. > > I would not say minimum but "bugfixing only" as fixing bugs is a good thing in > the branch:-) Only if the bugfixes don't require massive changes. If that's the case, I don't think it's a good idea to do this in an 'ongoing' branch. It's better to fix these in the trunk and make a new major release. > >> * major developments are done in branches from trunk until they have >> some releasable maturity. This means e.g. that the RME / saffire pro >> developments should really be in a separate branch. Once they are ready >> for the (beta) public they can be merged into the trunk. This will avoid >> the situation we have in 2.0 where the unfinished functionality had to >> be (e.g. DICE) stripped. > > Yeah, well. Trunk is kind of meant to be broken. Not broken in the sense that > incomplete commits happen, but that some minor features might not always work > as expected. We have to release more often (understatement of the year ;). This means that we need more control over the quality of the codebase. So I would prefer a repository strategy where we try to ensure that trunk is always in a releaseable state (testing). > > Saffire (dice-based) for example is not breaking anything. Its only extending > support for special devices. Basic support is always working... > > But for new core-features that break one or all platforms completely and are > not finished withing one commit, I would advice to create development branches > in /branches/work... Agreed. I think though that it's better to branch too often than too little. > >> I will release what is in the current 2.0 branch as 2.0.1 this weekend. > > Yippie!!! It's about time... Pieter |