openoffice-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Dennis E. Hamilton" <>
Subject RE: [Discuss] Review and improve graphics memory handling
Date Mon, 08 Jun 2015 15:44:38 GMT
I've never understood this business of having multiple releases as progressions on the same
code branch.  

It seems far more confusing than having a branch or tag that corresponds to the release identifier.
 It also helps if there is a need for a patch release at a particular branch.

It also makes check-out of a specific release branch easier.  And it is easy to confirm the
archive of the released source against its SVN.

Although there is a lot of code involved, I thought SVN used a Copy on Write strategy so copying
code into a branch does not create actual copies but links, with copies made only when a difference
is introduced at either end of the link.  Am I mistaken?

I don't have much skin in this game.  It just strikes me that there is a high risk of confusion
and possible error this way.  Even if a 412 is built from a copy of 411, rather than the trunk,
with changes then cherry-picked into it, it seems easier to inspect and to understand.

 - Dennis  

-----Original Message-----
From: Andrea Pescetti [] 
Sent: Sunday, June 7, 2015 18:57
Subject: Re: [Discuss] Review and improve graphics memory handling

On 02/06/2015 wrote:
> AFAIU AOO410 branch goes on for 411, 412, 413... versions. One branch
> for next mid-number change, e.g. AOO420 would need a new one. For AOO411
> we have no extra branch AFAIK, only a revision number in AOO410 branch.
> I would keep that schema - the goal of micro releases is minor
> changes/stability, no need for a new branch

I'm OK with this. I will commit changes to the existing AOO410 branch 
instead of creating AOO412 then.


To unsubscribe, e-mail:
For additional commands, e-mail:

To unsubscribe, e-mail:
For additional commands, e-mail:

View raw message