Forum OpenACS Development: Re: 5.0 branched from HEAD

6: Re: 5.0 branched from HEAD (response to 1)
Posted by Andrew Piskorski on
Third: If you check in bug fixes to oacs-5-0, be sure to also check them in to HEAD.

Fifth: Open issues: We plan to merge oacs-5-0 changes back to head either at each beta release or at each dot release (5.0.0, 5.0.1, etc), depending on what works best.

Those two directives are mutually contradictory! I suggest that no one ever commit the same change to both the oacs-5-0 branch and the Head. Commit a fix on oacs-5-0, then merge batches of such fixes back to the Head in some regular and agreed upon process.
7: Re: 5.0 branched from HEAD (response to 6)
Posted by Joel Aufrecht on
Can I get a permit to merge 5.0 doc work back to HEAD at will?
8: Re: 5.0 branched from HEAD (response to 7)
Posted by Jeff Davis on
Sure (you might want to think about a tagging strategy so you know whats been merged each way before you start going back and forth though). Also, I committed a bunch of stuff on oacs-5-0 so before you start changing head you might want to merge that over.

Generally it's a *lot* easier to work in one place and just merge forward (i.e. do everything on 5.0 and merge to head). Any time you merge forward you should tag what was merged). Maybe we should have oacs-5-merged-to-head and oasc-5-pending-to-head or something like that for such things. and then the merge process would be

cvs update -j oacs-5-merged-to-head -j oacs-5-pending-to-head foo
and when the merge was committed you would roll oacs-5-merged-to-head forward to the oacs-5-pending-to-head tag.