[Top][All Lists]

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

RE: two Modules, branch one module, or what?

From: Thornley, David
Subject: RE: two Modules, branch one module, or what?
Date: Mon, 11 Feb 2002 10:07:47 -0600

> -----Original Message-----
> From: address@hidden [mailto:address@hidden
> Sent: Monday, February 11, 2002 9:20 AM
> To: address@hidden
> Subject: two Modules, branch one module, or what?
> Hi,
> We have a development model where lots of "absolutely 
> necessary" additions
> to our in house product are made daily.  So, we release a 
> "stable build"
> several times a day.  Since these new features are added in 
> this way, it
> would seem that the typical stable/development branch 
> solution would not
> best suit our needs.

For these "absolutely necessary" additions (presumably fixed by
the next day's absolutely necessary additions), I don't see that
you need a development branch.  It seems to me that that development
could go nicely on the trunk.  While this differs from practice at
most enterprises, it doesn't look to me like it invalidates the
principles CVS is based on.

Is there a "really stable build" that is released now and then,
or is that considered unnecessary?

> releases, this is not the option we need.  Instead, something where
> development code could be checked in and flagged as 
> development would be
> nice.  Then one could build development or production and get 
> different
> products depending on the build flag.

I don't understand this.  Are you saying that there is development
going on separately from the necessary additions?  If so, you can
cut development branches for those projects and merge them in when
they're ready (or absolutely necessary, whichever comes first).

In that case, you would check out the trunk to get production code,
and the branch to get development code.

  Unless I overlooked 
> it, CVS does not
> support this.  So, it would seem that the only hack for this 
> would be to
> have two parallel modules.  One would have development code 
> and the other
> would be stable.

I don't see that this would have any advantages over branching,
and would be a pain to use.

reply via email to

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