Re: How Come?

[Sven Luther]

On Tue, Feb 03, 2004 at 08:30:16PM +1100, Andrew Clausen wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 02, 2004 at 06:06:51PM +0100, Sven Luther wrote:
> > My plan is for having : 
> > 
> > 
> > parted--mainline--1.6.6 -----> bugfix branch
> >        |
> >        V
> > parted--devel--1.6.7 -> parted--mainline--1.6.7 -----> bugfix branch
> >        |
> >        V
> > parted--devel--1.6.8 -> parted--mainline--1.6.8 -----> bugfix branch
> 
> Is this the standard approach?

It may well be, i don't really know, it is what makes more sense, and is
easy to do given the facilities arch offers.

> Did you mean parted--mainlain--1.6 and parted-devel--1.7 ?

Yeah, naturally.

> I think for 1.6.x, the releases (1.6.6, 1.6.7, etc.) should be snapshots
> of the branch at "suitable points", because bug-fixes only get
> incorporated into the following release.  (There won't be 1.6.6-bugfix1,
> right?)

Mmm, actually tags is a strange thing in arch. I tried using the tla
tags stuff, and creating a tags branch, but this was not really
satisfactory. Actually, there should be no problem in doing : 

parted--mainline--1.6 --> parted--mainline--1.6.6 --> parted--mainline--1.6.7
       |
       V
parted--devel--1.7 --> parted--mainline--1.7 --> parted--mainline--1.7.1

And so on, but i belive there is also something like 'configs', which is
even more suitable.

Friendly,

Sven Luther