[aerogear-dev] Maintenance branches

[Daniel Bevenius]

>For 1.0.1 not sure if it has to be also branch or just the master
otherwise Master should be for 1.1 stuff ?
I think we need something separate from master for 1.0.1 as that branch
should not contain the new features that are added to master. That branch
would only contain patches/bugfixes to the 1.0.0 version.


On 22 March 2013 10:18, Sebastien Blanc <scm.blanc at gmail.com> wrote:

> +1 to create a 1.0.0 branch
> For 1.0.1 not sure if it has to be also branch or just the master
> otherwise Master should be for 1.1 stuff ?
> Seb
>
>
>
> On Fri, Mar 22, 2013 at 10:12 AM, Daniel Bevenius <
> daniel.bevenius at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> I'd like to discuss how to handle maintenance branches. Sorry if this has
>> already been discussed, I think Kris posted something about this but I was
>> not able to find it.
>>
>> For example, now that we are about to release 1.0.0 we will tag that
>> release. After that should we create a 1.0.1 branch for patches/bugfixes
>> and then continue with new features in master?
>>
>> Since we are in a waiting state at the moment, which could happen again,
>> should we perhaps create a branch named 1.0.0, which we can use until the
>> release and then tag it and remove that branch. After that any issues would
>> be fixed in the 1.0.1 branch.
>>
>> Does this sound correct?
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> /Dan
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> aerogear-dev mailing list
>> aerogear-dev at lists.jboss.org
>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev
>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> aerogear-dev mailing list
> aerogear-dev at lists.jboss.org
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.jboss.org/pipermail/aerogear-dev/attachments/20130322/ac74a54f/attachment.html