subversion-users mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From C M <>
Subject Re: Shared branch vs single branch
Date Mon, 23 Sep 2013 20:04:50 GMT
Unfortunately, we are lacking on processes and there's a definite lack of
product management.

But coming back to  my original question: Are there any potential gotchas
with using a single/shared branch? For now, that's the only change the team
(and leadership) is looking to as the "solution".

Our developers code on a Unix like platform and have little SVN experience
to boot. The idea of turning over merging to them seems to be a recipe for
disaster. I would prefer to let the CM team handle the merges and figure
out what I did incorrectly to mess up the previous merges.

On Mon, Sep 23, 2013 at 2:42 PM, Les Mikesell <> wrote:

> On Mon, Sep 23, 2013 at 2:35 PM, Bob Archer <> wrote:
> >> On Mon, Sep 23, 2013 at 1:50 PM, Bob Archer <>
> wrote:
> >> >> It really depends. I think all work for a specific release should be
> done in a
> >> single branch/folder. Many people follow the stable trunk model. In
> this model
> >> you generally do all work on trunk and then branch for a release. This
> is the
> >> same model svn itself is developed under. In this model you would also
> use
> >> what are called "feature" branches. This is generally for a feature/use
> case that
> >> will take more than a day to complete or will be worked on by more than
> one
> >> developer.
> >> >
> >> > Once again, it's up to the people not the tool to ensure your release
> >> management is done properly.
> >>
> >> Well, sort-of.   It is always a good idea to (a) include tests for new
> >> code and (b) have a workflow that ensures that the tests are run and
> >> that someone checks the results.   Expecting one person to never make
> >> a mistake just doesn't always work out.
> >
> > Isn't is up to the people to put those processes in place? To create the
> correct workflow? To write the automation?
> >
> > I don't think I ever said it should be ONE person's responsibility to
> manually do this work. Where did I say that?
> You didn't explicitly say it was one person's fault, but what you said
> could easily be interpreted that way by anyone who had to ask the
> question in the first place....    Yes, people have to set things up,
> but there are tools that can help.
> --
>    Les Mikesell

View raw message