RE: [ros-dev] [VOTE] Miscelanea branches

[Casper Hornstrup]

>   -----Original Message-----
>  From: ros-dev-bounces(a)reactos.com 
>  [mailto:[e-mail]] On Behalf Of Alex Ionescu
>  Sent: 12. marts 2005 18:36
>  To: ReactOS Development List
>  Subject: Re: [ros-dev] [VOTE] Miscelanea branches
>  
>  Alex Ionescu wrote:
>  
> >   Some people actually like to have versionning for
> > their own private 
> >  work and have a nice way to revert/update.
> >  The whole point of an svn branch is so you don't lose your work, so 
> >  that others can see, and so that you have a versionning  
>  system to take 
> >   care of your own work. It seems barbaric and
> > fascist to disallow 
> >  someone from maitaning his own branch, even if his changes are 
> >  useless, trial-and-error, or simply shit.
> >
> >  Best regards,
> >  Alex Ionescu 
>  
>  This is my proposition:
>  
>  I admit that I fucked up (oooh big word) with the branch for 
>  many reasons, but I would still like to be able to do the following:
>  
>  1) Have alex_devel_branch
>  2) Create a bug fix or new feature, tag it as such
>  3) Test this bug fix or feature until it works
>  4) Merge to Head
>  5) Create new bug fix or new feature, tag it as such, STILL 
>  in the same branch
>  6) Lather, Rinse, Repeat.
>  
>  I want to be able to re-use that branch for adding new 
>  things, but for them to be UNIQUE/ATOMIC changes (as Casper 
>  calls them "feature branches"). So it would be a perpetually 
>  reusable feature branch, but only containing a single feature 
>  at one time, and always getting merged when that feature is complete.
>  
>  Can we have that middle ground?
>  
>  Best regards,
>  Alex Ionescu 
It's true that the work is safer in the repository and we should still use
branches. An alex_devel_branch is not a problem until that X MB change is
to go into trunk.

For bugfixes, I would be for your suggestion, but for new features,
I'd prefer a branch name that describes it's purpose.

Casper