Re: [Sablevm-developer] suggestion: sablevm developer doc

[Grzegorz B. P. <ga...@de...>]

W liście z wto, 18-03-2003, godz. 01:17, Prof. Etienne M. Gagnon pisze: 
> On Mon, Mar 17, 2003 at 03:53:20PM -0500, Chris Pickett wrote:
> > How about . . . we just have a development branch and the main trunk. 
> > Anyone can hack away on the development branch (obviously trying not to 
> > break things), and then once in a while Etienne merges changes into the 
> > main trunk.  Or some other such multi-developer version control idiom.
> The problem, with CVS, is that when you add something new on a branch,
> it is considered as head and thus shows up in the main trunk and in
> the Changelog.
Are you sure? CVS docs say sth. rather opposite, see
http://www.loria.fr/~molli/cvs/doc/cvs_5.html#SEC49

"CVS allows you to isolate changes onto a separate line of development,
 known as a branch. When you change files on a branch, those changes do
 not appear on the main trunk or other branches."

Projects like Mozilla use CVS in the model of HEAD (unstable,
development version) and branches (stable releases). If CVS weren't
suitable for this - would they use it?

I looked at the Subversion status and bugs targetted for next releases.
I haven't notoiced any bugs related to branches so there's a chance
they're usable w/ SVN.

Cheers,

					GBP
-- 
Grzegorz B. Prokopski <ga...@de...>
Debian http://www.debian.org/