But Drools isn't being developed according to some standard Development Life Cycle.

Not true, but the development process should be documented more. See /README.txt
We have plenty of things already set-up. Most recently we defined they idea focusing on "branch day" instead of "release day".
Feel free to open discussions on any other improvements we should do: you're right there's much to do. But 1 at a time please, so people can adjust to them.

Next thing is the split-up of the build and repositories (if possible).
After that we'll look into a lieutenant git model per repository, which is basically the coordination CM role you speak of :)

Op 03-01-11 14:49, Wolfgang Laun schreef:

OK, locally I can do whatever. But how am I supposed to get my work up to remote and master? Merge locally and then push?

10+ years with CM in my organisation have shown us that branched work is best integrated into the main (master) branch by some coordinating CM role. But Drools isn't being developed according to some standard Development Life Cycle.

-W

On 3 January 2011 14:38, ge0ffrey <ge0ffrey.spam@gmail.com> wrote:

Imo, topic branches should be local
or remote on a fork.
i dont think we should litter reference with remote topic branches.
it should only have release branches.
look at hibernate on github.
--
View this message in context: http://drools-java-rules-engine.46999.n3.nabble.com/git-branches-origin-username-tp2180410p2184778.html
Sent from the Drools - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
_______________________________________________
rules-dev mailing list
rules-dev@lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-dev
_______________________________________________
rules-dev mailing list
rules-dev@lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-dev

-- 
With kind regards,
Geoffrey De Smet