Branch development of 1.6.x vs 1.7.x?

6 views
Skip to first unread message

Josh Hansen

unread,
Sep 27, 2008, 9:01:53 PM9/27/08
to rife...@googlegroups.com
Hi Geert,

I'd like to do a little development and bug fixing against the 1.6.x
versions, and possibly against 1.5.x.

I can see tags for 1.5.1, and 1.6.1, and there is the trunk version, but
no branches (other than i18n):
http://svn.rifers.org/
http://svn.rifers.org/rife/tags/
http://svn.rifers.org/rife/branches/

Should I just code against the tagged versions (1.5.1 and 1.6.1) and
send you the diffs?

Some branches for bugfix development on releases would be nice... :)

Regards,

Josh
--
Joshua Hansen
Up Bear Enterprises
(541) 760-7685

Josh Hansen

unread,
Sep 27, 2008, 9:16:13 PM9/27/08
to rife...@googlegroups.com
Hi Geert,

Oh yeah: where is development towards 1.7 happening? "trunk" seems to
be 1.6.x (1.6.2 at the moment)... :)

Regards,

Josh
--
Joshua Hansen
Up Bear Enterprises
(541) 760-7685

Geert Bevin

unread,
Sep 28, 2008, 4:32:31 AM9/28/08
to rife...@googlegroups.com
Hey Josh,

development for 1.7 has been happening in trunk. However, since I've
been the only one working on RIFE for quite a while and I've had
barely time to do some 1.7 stuff, I never created any maintenance
branches. You've given you commit rights to all of svn.rifers.org. You
should be able to create a maintenance branch for the release you want
to work on and commit your changes. After that, you can merge the
diffs into trunk. Does that work for you?

Take care,

Geert

--
Geert Bevin
Terracotta - http://www.terracotta.org
Uwyn "Use what you need" - http://uwyn.com
RIFE Java application framework - http://rifers.org
Music and words - http://gbevin.com

Josh Hansen

unread,
Sep 28, 2008, 11:20:17 AM9/28/08
to rife...@googlegroups.com
Hi Geert,

Wow! All that power! :) Thanks -- I'll be sure to use it responsibly! :)

Good to know about trunk and 1.7. I'll create branches for at least
1.5.x and 1.6.x, as well as merging any changes to trunk.

All the best,

Josh
--
Joshua Hansen
Up Bear Enterprises
(541) 760-7685

Geert Bevin

unread,
Sep 29, 2008, 2:46:40 AM9/29/08
to rife...@googlegroups.com
Hi Joshua,

> Wow! All that power! :) Thanks -- I'll be sure to use it
> responsibly! :)

I'm sure you will, you've shown great involvement and responsibility
before :-)

> Good to know about trunk and 1.7. I'll create branches for at least
> 1.5.x and 1.6.x, as well as merging any changes to trunk.

Sounds good, thanks!

Take care,

Geert

Josh Hansen

unread,
Oct 7, 2008, 5:45:01 PM10/7/08
to rife...@googlegroups.com
Hi Geert,

Ok. I'm ready to create the branches.

One question:
* The naming pattern in the 'tags' hierarchy is "release-1.6",
"release-1.6.1", etc. For branches, do you have a preference or
recommendation for using "release-1.6.x", "maintenance-1.6.x", or simply
"1.6.x", or something else entirely?
http://svn.rifers.org/rife/tags/

As an example, the subversion project itself uses simple version numbers
for both tags and branches ("1.5.1" and "1.5.x" respectively):
http://svn.collab.net/repos/svn/branches/
http://svn.collab.net/repos/svn/tags/

Geert Bevin

unread,
Oct 8, 2008, 2:57:35 AM10/8/08
to rife...@googlegroups.com
Hi Josh,

I never really thought about it, but I quite like "maintenance-1.6.1".
What's your preference?

Take care,

Geert

Josh Hansen

unread,
Oct 8, 2008, 5:07:35 AM10/8/08
to rife...@googlegroups.com
Hi Geert,

If it were all up to me (uh oh -- watch out!), I was thinking that it
would be nice to go with simply "1.5.x", and then switch the naming
scheme for tags over to match (i.e. "1.5.1"). :) The rationale would be:
* Less typing / shorter URLs.

* Consistent w/ Subversion's own development scheme.
I looked at three different projects (Subversion, Tomcat, and Jetty),
and none of them were consistent [with each other]. Subversion and
Jetty were closest.

* They are automatically listed first when viewing the tree.
This is pretty handy where there are a many branches, such as feature
branches or developer branches. An example of this is the Subversion
branch list:
http://svn.collab.net/repos/svn/branches/

On the whole either scheme would work and "maintenance-1.6.x" is more
descriptive.

Feeling swayed or convinced one way or another? :)

Geert Bevin

unread,
Oct 8, 2008, 2:08:39 PM10/8/08
to rife...@googlegroups.com
Hi Josh,

I don't feel much like changing all existing tags. So imho,
"maintenance-1.6.1" is the best for branches. This also has the
advantage to clearly separate maintenance branches from other branches.

Take care,

Geert

Josh Hansen

unread,
Oct 8, 2008, 2:45:52 PM10/8/08
to rife...@googlegroups.com
Hi Geert,

Ok. Sounds good. :) BTW, I'll go with "maintenance-1.6.x" (note the
"x") since the branch will cover all bugfix releases of a given minor
version.

Josh Hansen

unread,
Oct 9, 2008, 2:45:30 PM10/9/08
to rife...@googlegroups.com
Hi Geert,

I've created two branches:
http://svn.rifers.org/rife/branches/maintenance-1.5.x/
http://svn.rifers.org/rife/branches/maintenance-1.6.x/

They are based off of tags/release-1.5.1 and tags/release-1.6.1,
respectively.

For reference, the command I used for the 1.6.x branch is:
$ svn copy http://svn.rifers.org/rife/tags/release-1.6.1
http://svn.rifers.org/rife/branches/maintenance-1.6.x -m "Maintenance
branch for 1.6.x."

On my system here (Windows XP), I additionally needed to specify the
'--username' option.

I haven't made any changes to them yet. Soon I will go begin porting
fixes from trunk to the 1.6.x branch.

All the best,

Josh
--
Joshua Hansen
Up Bear Enterprises
(541) 760-7685

Josh Hansen wrote:

Geert Bevin

unread,
Oct 9, 2008, 5:14:40 PM10/9/08
to rife...@googlegroups.com
Hi Josh,

Looks all very good! Thanks!

Take care,

Geert

Josh Hansen

unread,
Oct 9, 2008, 5:30:33 PM10/9/08
to rife...@googlegroups.com
Hi Geert,

You're welcome! :)

These will be really nice to have for ongoing development. :)

Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages