[
Date Prev][
Date Next][
Thread Prev][
Thread Next][
Date Index][
Thread Index]
[
List Home]
Re: [cf-dev] Branching strategy
|
That's what I also thought about. We should create a "1.0.0 hotfix branch" from the 1.0.0 tag on which we create 1.0.1, 1.0.2 etc and in addition to that also create a 1.x. branch for creating additional minor releases 1.1.0, 1.2.0 etc.
Indeed. Not sure if we want to be on the safe side and even have a 1.0.x branch for more emergency fixes, since new features
in 1.1.x might take a while until they are releasable. Probably we can do this on demand from an older commit then.
To: Californium (Cf) developer discussions <cf-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [cf-dev] Branching strategy
+1 for first releasing 1.0.1, then merging Scandium, element-connector & core into californium repo. It think we can keep tools and actinium separate (and have separate versioning for them).
Regarding the branching model: my understanding currently is that we will do development of 2.0 on master and create a 1.x branch based on the 1.0.1 tag (once we released that), right?
_______________________________________________
cf-dev mailing list
cf-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe from this list, visit
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cf-dev