[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

RE: A newbie question about branches

From: Thornley, David
Subject: RE: A newbie question about branches
Date: Tue, 20 Nov 2001 09:52:28 -0600

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Elbert "Andrés" Messa "Díaz [mailto:address@hidden
> Sent: Tuesday, November 20, 2001 7:23 AM
> To: address@hidden
> Subject: A newbie question about branches
> I have a project under CVS version control. Right now
> I am planning to make a dramatic change on a previous
> release of the project, but I don't want
> to affect the main trunk. 
> I would think that it is appropiate to create
> a new branch on that previous release, and make
> modifications to the branch. 
I completely agree.

> Since I won't incorporate the modifications on the
> main trunk, because both branches would be
> irreconciliable, should I just keep the branch forever
> and never merge? or is it worth it to create a
> complete new project
> starting on that previous release?
You don't have to merge branches for them to be useful.  We split
off a release branch for each release, and, while we will merge
bugfixes to later branches and head, there's stuff we don't

You could create a complete project, but that would lose some history
and probably increase the storage requirements (if you care about
that).  In addition, you'd lose the ability to merge bugfixes you
find.  In favor of a separate project, if you're going to be
working on both branches indefinitely, it will take longer and longer
to generate the tip of the branch.  In my case, given a slow server
and a 20,000 + line file with about thirty changes since the
branch was cut and about thirty changes on the branch, it's noticeable.

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]