[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Bugzilla for cfengine
From: |
Sven Mueller |
Subject: |
Re: Bugzilla for cfengine |
Date: |
Tue, 14 Dec 2004 16:46:02 +0100 |
User-agent: |
Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0 (Windows/20041206) |
John Sechrest wrote on 14/12/2004 16:18:
The reason I prefer subversion is the development process I prefer
(which is also used by the subversion project itself):
The repository consists of
project/trunk/ - Main development line
project/branches/ - private branches of developers, used to implement
bigger changes before getting them into the main
line
project/tags/ - release tags
Under project/tags/, there are
*.0.X/ - first tag from trunk to prepare new major release
*.0.X/candidates - text file containing possible additions to
that release, namely:
revisions: (revision numbers of commits to trunk)
comment: (What those revisions implement)
votes: (Votes of developers in favor or against this
changeset, change is applied when nobody
opposes and at least three developers vote
in favor of the change)
*.0.0/ - tagged from *.0.X to do new major release
*.0.*/ - tagged from *.0.X to do a new bugfix release
*.*.X/ - tagged from *.0.X to prepare new minor release,
handled the same as *.0.X (including /candidates)
*.*.0/ - tagged from *.*.X to do new minor release
*.*.*/ - tagged from *.*.X to do new bugfix release
non *.*.X tags are never touched again once they have been created.
Combined with the easy merging of changesets from one part of the
repository to another (like from /trunk to /tags/1.0.X), this is a very
powerful and still stable form of development. And sadly enough, it is
almost impossible to use this development style with CVS.
cu,
sven
--
---------------------[ Ciphire Signature ]----------------------
From: address@hidden signed email body (1229 characters)
Date: on 14 December 2004 at 15:46:12 GMT
To: address@hidden
----------------------------------------------------------------
: The message above has been secured using Ciphire Mail.
: Verify this signature and download your free encryption
: software at www.ciphire.com. The three garbled lines
: below are the sender's verifiable encoded signature.
----------------------------------------------------------------
00fAAAAAEAAADECr9BzQQAABwDAAIAAgACACDujyp7O8DTqcuAj29yUomSaBd6JK
q/N1CO7Jm8PT5PwQEARRR7cyqbKGdhZouquB9oOiXpu/i4je4AHN7stjczdK2MrY
4PudjguNNHPzxcAfjrk2vHit5I2NZrrix26f0I0g==
------------------[ End Ciphire Signed Message ]----------------
- Re: Bugzilla for cfengine, (continued)
- Re: Bugzilla for cfengine, Christian Pearce, 2004/12/15
- Re: Bugzilla for cfengine, Sven Mueller, 2004/12/15
- Re: Bugzilla for cfengine, John Sechrest, 2004/12/15
- Re: [Cfengine] Re: Bugzilla for cfengine, Bas van der Vlies, 2004/12/16
- Re: [Cfengine] Re: Bugzilla for cfengine, John Sechrest, 2004/12/16
- Re: Bugzilla for cfengine, Kevin Campbell, 2004/12/15
- Re: Bugzilla for cfengine, Christian Pearce, 2004/12/15
- Re: Bugzilla for cfengine, Darrell Fuhriman, 2004/12/15
- Re: Bugzilla for cfengine, Sven Mueller, 2004/12/14
- Re: Bugzilla for cfengine, John Sechrest, 2004/12/14
- Re: Bugzilla for cfengine,
Sven Mueller <=
- CVS for Cfengine (Was: Re: Bugzille for cfengine), Eric Sorenson, 2004/12/14
- Re: CVS for Cfengine (Was: Re: Bugzille for cfengine), John Sechrest, 2004/12/14
- Re: CVS for Cfengine (Was: Re: Bugzille for cfengine), Sven Mueller, 2004/12/14
- Re: CVS for Cfengine (Was: Re: Bugzille for cfengine), John Sechrest, 2004/12/14
- Re: CVS for Cfengine (Was: Re: Bugzille for cfengine), Chris Edillon, 2004/12/15
- Re: CVS for Cfengine (Was: Re: Bugzille for cfengine), Matt Small, 2004/12/15
- Re: CVS for Cfengine (Was: Re: Bugzille for cfengine), Sven Mueller, 2004/12/15
- Re: CVS for Cfengine (Was: Re: Bugzille for cfengine), Mark . Burgess, 2004/12/15
- Re: CVS for Cfengine (Was: Re: Bugzille for cfengine), Kevin Campbell, 2004/12/15
- Re: CVS for Cfengine (Was: Re: Bugzille for cfengine), Mark . Burgess, 2004/12/15