On 3/28/2006 1:16 PM, Matt England wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I have what I call a "best practice" question:
>
> When is it necessary (or at least useful) to branch?
>
> Here's my current answers (or at least how my group has been operating thus
> far):
>
> 1) When one needs to do "side"/private development in a way that breaks the
> day-to-day builds of the trunk.
>
> 2) When one needs to make bug fixes of an old revision/tag of the repo
> (possibly by back-merging fixes/features in a future revision) without
> inheriting all the new stuff in the trunk.
>
> Is this a comprehensive and concise list?
>
> I realize this is a rather broad question (and possibly a faq somewhere),
> but I'm rather short on research time at the moment, so I seek guidance
> from the community.
>
> I believe I want to minimize the number of branches made in my repos,
> although I feel like I want to tag often (I review a "tag" simply as an
> alias to a svnversion number--sort of a read-only branch). Is this, too, a
> reasonable and effective approach?
There's no real need to minimize the number of branches. If you want a
temporary branch, just delete it after you're done, and it won't clog up
your repository directory listings. It will still take up space in the
repository, and it will be possible to recover it unless you take
administrator action to remove it.) The only other cost of creating a
useless branch is that your logs end up longer.
Duncan Murdoch
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Tue Mar 28 21:41:19 2006