ready to merge trunk over SAMBA_3_0 ?

[Gerald (Jerry) Carter]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

derrell at samba.org wrote:
> Just a thought on this merge...
> 
> Are there currently-planned major (disruptive) changes that you 
> expect to be in trunk and not in SAMBA_3_0?  If not, then why
> not just leave trunk alone, as the current SAMBA_3_0 development
> "branch" (no need for multiple check-ins and just split off a
> separate  SAMBA_3_0 branch if/when some disruptive task is
> about to take place?

Derrell,

trunk *is* the SAMBA_3_0 development branch.  This is how
things work and at this point I see no justification to change.
With svn, this is the best model we can get.  And one that we
are all attuned for.

I'm playing with bzr and plan to start using that for my own
development tree.  Distributed SCM provides the features that
people in this thread want.  SVN does not.

For the foreseeable future, the main repository will stay in
SVN and we will cut releases from that.  However, it is possible
that rather than using tmp branches or trunk, individual developers
will start using bzr.  This gives us the distributed development
model without the bottleneck of a single person maintaining the
core tree.  I'm still experiementing though.  So this might not
work long term as I hope.




cheers, jerry

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFD4imeIR7qMdg1EfYRApqwAJ98rzejp1wnpEFBrAT/3yhDthmNIQCgj5Cl
4eeEpts5s0tzjFSoJ8wU/PM=
=+7hI
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----