Re: [GUSDEV] bug #33 is marked as fixed but ...

[Michael S. <m...@sa...>]

Comments below...

Fernan Aguero wrote:
> +----[ Mark Heiges <mh...@ug...> (08.May.2006 16:35):
> |
> | It's fixed in 3.6-Dev
> | 
> | $ svn log -r4310 https://cbil.upenn.edu/svn/gus/GusSchema/branches/ 
> | 3-6-Dev/
> | ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> | r4310 | msaffitz | 2005-12-11 12:20:06 -0500 (Sun, 11 Dec 2005) | 1 line
> | 
> | fix for 33, Schema changes to capture more information from dbEST and
> | ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> |
> +----]
> 
> Thanks Mark,
> 
> based on the followup comments for the bug I thought some of
> the changes ended up in 3.5.1.
> 
> But also, I thought that 'trunk' was the main line of
> development, and thus that checking out code from 'trunk'
> would get me the latest development snapshot as opposed to
> getting code from a branch, which, well, being branched from the
> 'trunk' is supposed to carry a snapshot + fixes or
> development made after branching. But this is all based on
> my past experience with CVS.
> 
> I'm not too familiar with svn but I was under the impression
> that it was a drop-in replacement for CVS with additional
> features.

Yes...  subversion is intended as a cvs replacement, and the assumption 
that development occurs on the trunk is accurate... except in this case. 
  This is due to historical reasons:  GUS had been a work in progress, 
without discreet releases, and most people were thus used to working 
directly in the trunk.  It was just easier to branch for development and 
keep the trunk stable than change the community's behavior.

> 
> Which leads me to another question (to the SVN meisters):
> how's the svn repository laid out, and how is the
> development cycle mapped onto the repository? What's the
> main line of development? Trunk?

At least when I was working on it (which was up to 1/06), trunk was 
stable and branches/tags contained historical and dev releases.

> 
> When I browse https://www.cbil.upenn.edu/svn/gus/ I see 
> 'branches', 'tags' and 'trunk' which to me look pretty much
> like CVS. That's why I supposed that 'trunk' was the main
> line of development.
> 
> Say you've already branched from trunk for 3.6, then any
> change made into this branch would have to be merged back
> into the trunk in order to be also incorporated into future
> releases ... unless there's some svn magic I'm unaware of.
> 

This is correct.

AFAIK/remember, Schema 3.6 is basically ready to go, but the 
AppFramework components do not yet support it.  3.6 changes were marked 
resolved, but not closed with the assumption that that would occur when 
it was released.

--Mike

> Fernan
>