|Main Archive Page > Month Archives > spamassassin-dev archives|
On 09/14, Kevin A. McGrail wrote:
> Here's my best recap and explanation because I think you are confusing the
> branch issue too much.
To summarize: Incrementing the version from 3.3.x to 3.4.x without
branching svn qualifies as "branching".
After re-reading this thread, I am hopeful that you are the only one who
feels this way, and I would like you to please stop it :)
Say this month, September, we do a release from trunk, call it 3.4.0, create
an svn branch from trunk called 3.4 (due to status quo). Then in January,
assuming we still want to do another release of what is in trunk at that
time, with no major changes, and call it 3.4.1. What do we do with svn
I guess the clearest I can be is to say: I'd like the releases
to always come from trunk (either directly built from trunk, or svn
branched around the time of release), unless a reason comes up not to.
I don't care what the version numbers are, and I don't care (much)
if you want to copy trunk to another svn branch around that time.
So I guess I'm back to my last suggestion:
September: Release from trunk, version 3.4.0, svn branched to 3.4.0 (not 3.4)
January: Release from trunk, version 3.4.1, svn branched to 3.4.1
I don't think the svn branching is necessary, but if it makes some folks
more comfortable, and we completely stop backporting patches, I don't
think it's a problem.
-- "The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed -- and hence clamorous to be led to safety -- by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary." - H. L. Mencken http://www.ChaosReigns.com