From: Hubert Figuiere (email@example.com)
Date: Wed Apr 24 2002 - 17:28:51 EDT
I rethought about the development plans I posted recently.
It seems stupid to create a new tree for abi1.2. Mozilla an OpenOffice
are managed in CVS with trouble. So why not us.
So here is the new plan:
1.0.1 will soon be release due to late bugs. Instead of just tagging
it, we should fork it.
The forked branch will be the 1.0.x branch, aka stable.
The HEAD branch (trunk) will be the development branch.
Each new 1.0.x release will lead to a new branch that will stop at
each release. That way we can be sure to release a new stable version
without to much annoyance.
Each 1.1.x release (unstable) will lead to a branch that'll end with
Each 1.2.x release (1.2 stable) will lead to a branch that'll end with
Release 1.2 will branch, make the 1.0.x branch be closed and be the
stable branch. At that time head branch will be the 1.3.x leading to
1.4 or 2.0 (depending on whether we want to copy Linux kernel
versionning or not).
Any comment ?
I may provide soon a diagram to show that :-)
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Wed Apr 24 2002 - 17:30:16 EDT