>From: Mark Phippard <email@example.com>
>Subject: Re: [Subclipse-users] Recommendations for branch/tag structure for
>Date: Mon, 13 Mar 2006 18:31:12 -0500
>I suspect you meant to send this to firstname.lastname@example.org, not
>Subclipse. You will certainly hit a wider audience with more opinions.
>I would create a branch for a task, perhaps with a by developer grouping
>layer above it to break up the tree. Then just delete the branches when
>they are done.
>Personally, I prefer the model that Subversion (and to a much lesser extent
>Subclipse) follow. Generally people work on trunk. Development branches
>are reserved for special cases such as large or length changes. Release
>branches are created from trunk and then stabilized by selectively
>backporting fixes from trunk to the release branch.
>There are literally a hundred different ways to approach this and they all
>have pluses and minuses.
Thanks for the kind reply to my mis-placed post... :-)
So, when you are ready to do a release, THAT is when you branch. Fixes and
ongoing development are both done in trunk, and only fixes related to bugs
found during testing are integrated back into the release branch.
The problem we keep running into is that a developer can never work on a
single task at a time. Something gets started, then another task gets a
priority bump, and you end up working on THAT for a while. If the earlier
task involves some of the same files, then all the work on the previous task
needs to be backed up somewhere, the changes reverted, and then start up on
the new task. When it is finished and checked in, all the backed up files
must be copied back to the working copy and then updated to get the stuff
that was just checked in.
It just seems so backwards! I thought VC was supposed to REMOVE the need to
do this kind of thing...
To unsubscribe, e-mail: email@example.com
For additional commands, e-mail: firstname.lastname@example.org
Received on Tue Mar 14 01:14:20 2006