[crossfire] CVS branches

[Nicolas Weeger]

Hello.

>
     
       The other issue is that generally, I'm not seeing so many commits that
     
     >
     
      having people hold off a week would seem like much an issue.
     
     
Well of course we can always wait one or two weeks to add features. But
sometimes it's things we'd rather have people test fast than wait weeks.
Also need to consider the possibility of finding a weird bug weeks after
the release - nice to be able to backport to current stable even after
having a whole lot of commits.

>
     
       The simpler approach would not do real branches, just for me to keep a
     
     >
     
      checked out copy and use that when making the release, and bring over
     
     >
     
      changes manually that are critical in nature.  Problem with that is you
     
     >
     
      can get the case where there is no version is CVS that directly
     
     >
     
      corresponds to the released version. However, I suppose in that case, a
     
     >
     
      branch for any relevant files could be made at that time.
     
     
That could work, but you'd also need to send the files to specific
platforms maintainers (me for Windows) to have synchronised releases,
with same code.

>
     
       But what it really comes down to is that it is more work for the person
     
     >
     
      doing the release (me), and I really don't want to make things any more
     
     >
     
      complicated for myself - I'd much rather be dong stuff more worthwhile
     
     >
     
      than syncing up branches.
     
     
On the other hand having a branch lets more people contribute to fixing
bugs on that release, anyone could backport as opposed to your scenario.
Also, I don't think there's a rule in stone saying only you can do
releases, is there? :) I'm sure we'd find people to help for that. I'm
also pretty sure CVS helps a lot for merging changes.

Just my two cents of euro :)

Ryo