Received: from spf1.us4.outblaze.com (spf1.us4.outblaze.com [205.158.62.23]) by sdf.lonestar.org (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id j0OCpp7O004084 for ; Mon, 24 Jan 2005 12:51:51 GMT Received: from lists.gnu.org (lists.gnu.org [199.232.76.165]) by spf1.us4.outblaze.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F317129853C for ; Mon, 24 Jan 2005 12:52:21 +0000 (GMT) Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Ct3tq-0003BK-7S for migo@homemail.com; Mon, 24 Jan 2005 08:04:58 -0500 Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1Ct3nG-0001xS-Po for gnu-arch-users@gnu.org; Mon, 24 Jan 2005 07:58:11 -0500 Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1Ct3n7-0001ud-L3 for gnu-arch-users@gnu.org; Mon, 24 Jan 2005 07:58:01 -0500 Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Ct3n6-0001lE-Tv for gnu-arch-users@gnu.org; Mon, 24 Jan 2005 07:58:01 -0500 Received: from [195.27.129.236] (helo=mailsc1.simcon-mt.com) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1Ct3D9-0006P0-1b for gnu-arch-users@gnu.org; Mon, 24 Jan 2005 07:20:51 -0500 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mailsc1.simcon-mt.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 82E263247F; Mon, 24 Jan 2005 13:20:49 +0100 (CET) Received: from localhost (localhost.local [127.0.0.1]) by gate.local (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1C52D10479; Mon, 24 Jan 2005 13:20:48 +0100 (CET) Received: by vandal.local (Postfix, from userid 1001) id 572C6AEFF7; Mon, 24 Jan 2005 13:18:55 +0100 (CET) Date: Mon, 24 Jan 2005 13:18:55 +0100 From: "Andrei A. Voropaev" To: John A Meinel Subject: Re: [Gnu-arch-users] strategy to handle back-fixies Message-ID: <20050124121855.GC22133@vandal.simcon-mt.de> Mail-Followup-To: John A Meinel , Harald Meland , gnu-arch-users@gnu.org References: <20050120090735.GA18766@vandal.simcon-mt.de> <20050120200644.GA7715@vagabond> <20050121082757.GA19548@vandal.simcon-mt.de> <20050121133740.GG19548@vandal.simcon-mt.de> <41F11FF3.5020501@arbash-meinel.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <41F11FF3.5020501@arbash-meinel.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.6i X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at local gate Cc: gnu-arch-users@gnu.org, Harald Meland X-BeenThere: gnu-arch-users@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: a discussion list for all things arch-ish List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: gnu-arch-users-bounces+migo=homemail.com@gnu.org Errors-To: gnu-arch-users-bounces+migo=homemail.com@gnu.org Status: RO Content-Length: 1133 Lines: 30 On Fri, Jan 21, 2005 at 09:29:55AM -0600, John A Meinel wrote: [...] > The only difference between what you said, and the recommendation, is > the idea of keeping a "release" branch. Often, it is not good enough to > know what the latest 1.0 version is (1.0.1, 1.0.2, etc). You need to be > able to get a specific one. Customer Foo has installed 1.0.1, you've > already done some work and are on 1.2, but you have also backported some > fixes and have a 1.0.3 release. [...] Ok. After carefully studying everything I feel like I got things straight. (All sigh :) Really my proposal was also right, but kind of less convinient. I was going to create new branches for each release I did (including patch levels). Your proposal with release branch eliminates this, since patch level shall correspond with 'patch-1', 'patch-2' etc. Ok. Thanks for your help. -- Minds, like parachutes, function best when open _______________________________________________ Gnu-arch-users mailing list Gnu-arch-users@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-arch-users GNU arch home page: http://savannah.gnu.org/projects/gnu-arch/