Improtant : creating 0.9.0 branch ?

[Gilles Caulier]

Hi all,

We have already discuted about future svn branch to use on the future,
especially to use :

- '/trunk/extragear/graphics/digikam/' for future unstable 0.9.0 serie
- '/tags/digikam' for stable serie
- '/branches/digikam' unused.

Fix me if something is wrong here...

But, I have a _MAJOR_ problem on my computer_S_. I use 2 computers to develop
digikam &co.

- My laptop.
- My office computer.

The are large source code repository to sync between these computer, with 3
branchs :

- current (svn)
- 0.8.1 (unstable using image properties sidebar and RAW file support)
- 0.9.0 (unstable like 0.8.1 + Dimage implementation instead imlib2)

This situation is very complex and infernal to manage. I can't continue to
work like this without _LOST_ any codes somewhere !!!

To clean up future digikam developement (and my computers (:=)))), I propose
to create a new 0.9.0 branch (and only one) in svn with only my unstable
0.9.0 implementation and forget definitivly my 0.8.1 implementation for the
future. This is want mean that image properties sidebar and raw files support
on IE will coming only with 0.9.0 release ! 0.8.x will staying on trunk and
only bugs fix will be commited into.

Yes, Tom, this is want mean too that we reproduce the 0.7.x -> 0.8.x branchs
way, and especially the branch merging when we will moving 0.9.0 branch to
trunk.

To resume my idea :

- '/trunk/extragear/graphics/digikam/' == 0.8.x serie with bugfix.
- '/tags/digikam' == only tagging releases.
- '/branches/digikam' == 0.9.0 unstable.

If you have a better solution, please let's me hear.
--
Gilles Caulier
_______________________________________________
Digikam-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/digikam-devel

[Marcel Wiesweg]

> Yes, Tom, this is want mean too that we reproduce the 0.7.x -> 0.8.x
> branchs way, and especially the branch merging when we will moving 0.9.0
> branch to trunk.
>
> To resume my idea :
>
> - '/trunk/extragear/graphics/digikam/' == 0.8.x serie with bugfix.
> - '/tags/digikam' == only tagging releases.
> - '/branches/digikam' == 0.9.0 unstable.
>
> If you have a better solution, please let's me hear.

I am no digikam developer and I really don't want to interfere with your
decisions, however I cannot resist to tell you how I would do this.

I understand you want one development line "0.9" and one stable bugfix line
"0.8.x".
Put up a strict policy that every bug that applies to 0.9 is fixed in 0.9 and
then immediately backported to 0.8.x. Every bug that does not apply to 0.9 is
only fixed in 0.8.x. No need to port anything from 0.8.x to 0.9.
Then no merge is needed, only copy or move.
The lines will diverge, and porting is something svn merge cannot do for you.

If you depend on your two-computer setup, I think it is okay if you create a
completely private branch to sync your computers for private, intermediate
changes - then you commit when you change your workplace and merge when you
would commit in a usual setup.
Remember that "svn merge <branch>" is evil (*) and "svn merge -r <revision of
last merge>:HEAD <branch>" is your friend.

(*) unless you in a long-lasting feature branch previously merged every change
committed after the branching to <working dir> to the <branch> and only then
do the "svn merge <branch>" to <working dir>

Marcel
_______________________________________________
Digikam-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/digikam-devel

[Gilles Caulier]

Le Jeudi 17 Novembre 2005 20:36, Marcel Wiesweg a écrit :

> > Yes, Tom, this is want mean too that we reproduce the 0.7.x -> 0.8.x
> > branchs way, and especially the branch merging when we will moving 0.9.0
> > branch to trunk.
> >
> > To resume my idea :
> >
> > - '/trunk/extragear/graphics/digikam/' == 0.8.x serie with bugfix.
> > - '/tags/digikam' == only tagging releases.
> > - '/branches/digikam' == 0.9.0 unstable.
> >
> > If you have a better solution, please let's me hear.
>
> I am no digikam developer and I really don't want to interfere with your
> decisions, however I cannot resist to tell you how I would do this.
>
> I understand you want one development line "0.9" and one stable bugfix line
> "0.8.x".
> Put up a strict policy that every bug that applies to 0.9 is fixed in 0.9
> and then immediately backported to 0.8.x. Every bug that does not apply to
> 0.9 is only fixed in 0.8.x. No need to port anything from 0.8.x to 0.9.
> Then no merge is needed, only copy or move.
> The lines will diverge, and porting is something svn merge cannot do for
> you.
>
> If you depend on your two-computer setup, I think it is okay if you create
> a completely private branch to sync your computers for private,
> intermediate changes - then you commit when you change your workplace and
> merge when you would commit in a usual setup.
> Remember that "svn merge <branch>" is evil (*) and "svn merge -r <revision
> of last merge>:HEAD <branch>" is your friend.
>
> (*) unless you in a long-lasting feature branch previously merged every
> change committed after the branching to <working dir> to the <branch> and
> only then do the "svn merge <branch>" to <working dir>
>
> Marcel

Thanks for these remarks Marcel.

Gilles
_______________________________________________
Digikam-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/digikam-devel