"Peter Dimov" <pdimov@mmltd.net> escribió en el mensaje news:004d01c53761$6413ecf0$6501a8c0@pdimov2...
Victor A. Wagner Jr. wrote:
At Friday 2005-04-01 15:17, you wrote:
Here's my suggestion for a release schedule. We allow two weeks to get all of the new features and bug-fixes we want into CVS, but still try to keep things sane. Then we fix bugs on the CVS trunk for a week, branch and fix bugs for another week, and then release on May 1. So, the important dates are: April 15 (two weeks from today): feature-freeze on CVS trunk. April 22 (three weeks from today): branch for 1.33.0
I'll say this again.... if you branch, branch the development that's NOT related to 1.33.0
I'll agree again. The changes I check in when we are in release mode (have a release branch active) _always_ go to both the trunk and the branch. The branch doesn't help me in any way.
Apr 15: feature freeze Release "when it's done"
FWIW, I agree. In fact, it took some time to understand our current model becasue I had my mind setup with release-THEN-branch. I just couldn't get into the idea of working on something else than a release (once the release is sheduled). Even in my own projects, I never move past a release without finishing it first; so I couldn't understood why was there an early branch. As Peter, I just have to _always_ propagate my work into the Release branch simply becasue I wouldn't be working on anything but the release until it's finish. In the odd event that I have something terribly hot that I can't wait to commit for a post-release version, I would just keep it in my disk. Just my 2c Fernando Cacciola SciSoft