You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@openoffice.apache.org by "Marcus (OOo)" <ma...@wtnet.de> on 2011/06/29 14:09:37 UTC
Naming of trunk and feature branches
With the discussions about the master and feature branches, the
following question comes to my mind.
What about this naming schema for master and feature branches? *)
In the past we had the following:
DEV300 = master/trunk/head
This will never lead to a release
OOO340 = branch
Branched from a specific DEV300 milestone to stablize the code when
coming closer to a specific release (here: OOo 3.4)
I would say we should stay with this schema to name master and feature
branches.
With the exception that is should be DEV400 instead as OOo 3.0 is done
and we are (somehow) on the way to a 4.0 version. ;-)
*)
Sorry if this is way to early to decide and not necessary before we have
a established svn repo. I just wanted to have a agreement before it's
maybe too late and a renaming to complex.
Marcus
Re: Naming of trunk and feature branches
Posted by Greg Stein <gs...@gmail.com>.
On Jun 29, 2011 9:40 AM, "Michael Stahl" <ms...@openoffice.org> wrote:
>
> On 29.06.2011 15:03, Greg Stein wrote:
>>
>> Branches can be named whatever we'd like. My own preference would be
>> to call this: /branches/3.4.x
>>
>> The "OOO" is awfully redundant, and the last digit ("0") doesn't make
>> sense since we would be releasing patches from the branch such as
>> 3.4.1. The "3.4.x" naming is used by many products, and it has worked
>> out very well.
>
>
> it wouldn't be a surprise to me if the reason for the "OOO340" name would
be that it has to be exactly 3 letters followed by exactly 3 digits, or
otherwise some tooling breaks.
>
> for example, the 2.4.x CVS release branch was called OOH680 (what the heck
does that mean?)
Oh, dear. ... I don't even want to believe that tooling does this... oy.
>
> indeed, why not "3.4.x"
>
> --
> Q: How many Prolog programmers to change a lightbulb?
> A: no.
*THAT* is hilarious.
Cheers,
-g
Re: Naming of trunk and feature branches
Posted by Jens-Heiner Rechtien <jh...@web.de>.
On 06/29/2011 03:54 PM, Marcus (OOo) wrote:
> Am 06/29/2011 03:39 PM, schrieb Michael Stahl:
>> On 29.06.2011 15:03, Greg Stein wrote:
>>> Branches can be named whatever we'd like. My own preference would be
>>> to call this: /branches/3.4.x
>>>
>>> The "OOO" is awfully redundant, and the last digit ("0") doesn't make
>>> sense since we would be releasing patches from the branch such as
>>> 3.4.1. The "3.4.x" naming is used by many products, and it has worked
>>> out very well.
>>
>> it wouldn't be a surprise to me if the reason for the "OOO340" name
>> would be that it has to be exactly 3 letters followed by exactly 3
>> digits, or otherwise some tooling breaks.
I'm sure there will be a few tooling breaks when we change the naming
scheme, but not as many as some people assume :-) They also will be
easily fixed.
>>
>> for example, the 2.4.x CVS release branch was called OOH680 (what the
>> heck does that mean?)
>
> oh yes, right, I remember there was a special purpose for these naming
> schema. Let's see what Heiner will tell us. :-P
The naming scheme was invented long before CWSs and milestone builds
were introduced. It made kinda sense back then and stayed simply due to
inertia. Agreed it looks rather arbitrary from the outside but so are
code names like "Karmic Koala" or Linux kernel versions like 2.6.39.2
... yes I know they have fixed that recently :-)
The only important thing is that people have a name for what they are
speaking about. Typically what is needed is a name for each code line. A
code line in the OOo context usually represented a feature release plus
subsequent bug fix releases.
With the old scheme of having one feature release and one bug fix
release alternating every quarter of a year plus security fixed for up
to seven year old releases we had a whole bunch of code lines. I'm glad
we have now the opportunity to clean this up.
For reference (not everyone here might know the old naming scheme):
DEV300 is what people in other projects might call the trunk, the main
development code line. All new features went into DEV300. The last
milestone on this code line was m106.
When OOo neared a new feature release, a release code line was opened by
branching of from the main development code line for stabilizing. The
last one was called OOO340 for the upcoming OOo 3.4 release.
Incidentally OOO340 was branched of DEV300 m106, thus there is no new
stuff in the main development code line DEV300 which is not also in
OOO340. Lucky timing, for once. There was just one milestone m1 on
OOO340 with the integration of about a handful of bug fixes and a few
late features.
Heiner
--
Jens-Heiner Rechtien
Re: Naming of trunk and feature branches
Posted by "Marcus (OOo)" <ma...@wtnet.de>.
Am 06/29/2011 03:39 PM, schrieb Michael Stahl:
> On 29.06.2011 15:03, Greg Stein wrote:
>> Branches can be named whatever we'd like. My own preference would be
>> to call this: /branches/3.4.x
>>
>> The "OOO" is awfully redundant, and the last digit ("0") doesn't make
>> sense since we would be releasing patches from the branch such as
>> 3.4.1. The "3.4.x" naming is used by many products, and it has worked
>> out very well.
>
> it wouldn't be a surprise to me if the reason for the "OOO340" name
> would be that it has to be exactly 3 letters followed by exactly 3
> digits, or otherwise some tooling breaks.
>
> for example, the 2.4.x CVS release branch was called OOH680 (what the
> heck does that mean?)
oh yes, right, I remember there was a special purpose for these naming
schema. Let's see what Heiner will tell us. :-P
Marcus
Re: Naming of trunk and feature branches
Posted by Michael Stahl <ms...@openoffice.org>.
On 29.06.2011 15:03, Greg Stein wrote:
> Branches can be named whatever we'd like. My own preference would be
> to call this: /branches/3.4.x
>
> The "OOO" is awfully redundant, and the last digit ("0") doesn't make
> sense since we would be releasing patches from the branch such as
> 3.4.1. The "3.4.x" naming is used by many products, and it has worked
> out very well.
it wouldn't be a surprise to me if the reason for the "OOO340" name
would be that it has to be exactly 3 letters followed by exactly 3
digits, or otherwise some tooling breaks.
for example, the 2.4.x CVS release branch was called OOH680 (what the
heck does that mean?)
indeed, why not "3.4.x"
--
Q: How many Prolog programmers to change a lightbulb?
A: no.
Re: Naming of trunk and feature branches
Posted by "Marcus (OOo)" <ma...@wtnet.de>.
Am 07/01/2011 05:23 PM, schrieb Alexandro Colorado:
> On Fri, Jul 1, 2011 at 10:20 AM, Alexandro Colorado<jz...@openoffice.org>wrote:
>> On Fri, Jul 1, 2011 at 10:13 AM, Marcus (OOo)<ma...@wtnet.de>wrote:
>>> Am 07/01/2011 04:56 PM, schrieb Alexandro Colorado:
>>> On Fri, Jul 1, 2011 at 9:46 AM, Marcus (OOo)<ma...@wtnet.de>
>>>> wrote:
>>>> Am 06/30/2011 04:03 AM, schrieb Alexandro Colorado:
>>>>> On Wed, Jun 29, 2011 at 8:33 AM, Marcus (OOo)<ma...@wtnet.de>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Sorry, it seems I wasn't clear enough.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I don't think about how to name directories and files in the SVN repo
>>>>>>> itself. Sure we can stick with the schema like it is done in other
>>>>>>> projects.
>>>>>>> It's more a general thing how to present trunk and branches to the
>>>>>>> outside.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> E.g., when we release bits we have to make clear into which direction
>>>>>>> they
>>>>>>> point. It's a difference if we use a name like "branch 3.4.x" or tell
>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>> people it's "OOO 3.4.0" or maybe "AOOO 3.4.0".
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> So, I don't think that a trailing 0 is not ? when it is the 3.4.0
>>>>>>> release.
>>>>>>> And the OOO is still necessary to show it's from our project. Of
>>>>>>> course
>>>>>>> it
>>>>>>> could be "AOOO" or whatever we will agree to.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> How to name the release files is another thing. There should be a
>>>>>>> clear
>>>>>>> structure to keep it simple and straight for scripts. But this is a
>>>>>>> topic
>>>>>>> for later.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I hope it's more clear now. ;-)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> My bad also misconstruct the naming conversation. Well we used to
>>>>>> have
>>>>>> different branches each with a name OOODEV was for the always
>>>>>> development
>>>>>> branch and OOO for the actual release branches.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> I don't remember OOODEV as a name somewhere.
>>>>>
>>>>> So usually they got rid of the dots for clarity, and added a m for
>>>>>
>>>>>> milestone:
>>>>>> http://development.openoffice.org/releases/
>>>>>> and DEV:
>>>>>> http://development.openoffice.org/releases/dev_index.html
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> I'm sorry but I don't understand what you want to express with the both
>>>>> links. Please can you describe it in other words?
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I am pointing you to the naming of the branches and their dinamics. Isn't
>>>> that what you were addressing at first? Not sure what you mean by not
>>>>
>>>
>>> Yes, that's right.
>>>
>>>
>>> remembering OOODEV as a name, after you saw the link with the OOODEV
>>>> branch.
>>>>
>>>
>>> There is no OOODEV on the webpage. It's speaking about DEV and OOO
>>> milestones.
>>
>>
>> You sure? there is the unstable codeline:
>> http://development.openoffice.org/releases/dev_index.html#dev300
>> You dont get the OOO till the actual filename download. I guess it was
>> getting long.
>>
>
> If you go to the latest DEV300m106
> http://development.openoffice.org/releases/DEV300m106_snapshot.html
> you'll see:
> This snapshot build will install as OOo-Dev 3.4.
Ah, you mean the product name that is the filename, too. I wasn't away
of that you meant this. As stated elsewhere in this thread choosing the
right filenames can be done later.
Marcus
Re: Naming of trunk and feature branches
Posted by Alexandro Colorado <jz...@openoffice.org>.
On Fri, Jul 1, 2011 at 10:20 AM, Alexandro Colorado <jz...@openoffice.org>wrote:
>
>
> On Fri, Jul 1, 2011 at 10:13 AM, Marcus (OOo) <ma...@wtnet.de>wrote:
>
>> Am 07/01/2011 04:56 PM, schrieb Alexandro Colorado:
>>
>> On Fri, Jul 1, 2011 at 9:46 AM, Marcus (OOo)<ma...@wtnet.de>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Am 06/30/2011 04:03 AM, schrieb Alexandro Colorado:
>>>>
>>>> On Wed, Jun 29, 2011 at 8:33 AM, Marcus (OOo)<ma...@wtnet.de>
>>>>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Sorry, it seems I wasn't clear enough.
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I don't think about how to name directories and files in the SVN repo
>>>>>> itself. Sure we can stick with the schema like it is done in other
>>>>>> projects.
>>>>>> It's more a general thing how to present trunk and branches to the
>>>>>> outside.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> E.g., when we release bits we have to make clear into which direction
>>>>>> they
>>>>>> point. It's a difference if we use a name like "branch 3.4.x" or tell
>>>>>> the
>>>>>> people it's "OOO 3.4.0" or maybe "AOOO 3.4.0".
>>>>>>
>>>>>> So, I don't think that a trailing 0 is not ? when it is the 3.4.0
>>>>>> release.
>>>>>> And the OOO is still necessary to show it's from our project. Of
>>>>>> course
>>>>>> it
>>>>>> could be "AOOO" or whatever we will agree to.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> How to name the release files is another thing. There should be a
>>>>>> clear
>>>>>> structure to keep it simple and straight for scripts. But this is a
>>>>>> topic
>>>>>> for later.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I hope it's more clear now. ;-)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> My bad also misconstruct the naming conversation. Well we used to
>>>>> have
>>>>> different branches each with a name OOODEV was for the always
>>>>> development
>>>>> branch and OOO for the actual release branches.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I don't remember OOODEV as a name somewhere.
>>>>
>>>> So usually they got rid of the dots for clarity, and added a m for
>>>>
>>>>> milestone:
>>>>> http://development.openoffice.org/releases/
>>>>> and DEV:
>>>>> http://development.openoffice.org/releases/dev_index.html
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I'm sorry but I don't understand what you want to express with the both
>>>> links. Please can you describe it in other words?
>>>>
>>>
>>> I am pointing you to the naming of the branches and their dinamics. Isn't
>>> that what you were addressing at first? Not sure what you mean by not
>>>
>>
>> Yes, that's right.
>>
>>
>> remembering OOODEV as a name, after you saw the link with the OOODEV
>>> branch.
>>>
>>
>> There is no OOODEV on the webpage. It's speaking about DEV and OOO
>> milestones.
>
>
> You sure? there is the unstable codeline:
> http://development.openoffice.org/releases/dev_index.html#dev300
> You dont get the OOO till the actual filename download. I guess it was
> getting long.
>
If you go to the latest DEV300m106
http://development.openoffice.org/releases/DEV300m106_snapshot.html
you'll see:
This snapshot build will install as OOo-Dev 3.4.
>
>
>>
>>
>> Marcus
>>
>>
>>
>> Am 06/29/2011 03:03 PM, schrieb Greg Stein:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> On Wed, Jun 29, 2011 at 08:09, Marcus (OOo)<ma...@wtnet.de>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> With the discussions about the master and feature branches, the
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> following
>>>>>>>> question comes to my mind.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> What about this naming schema for master and feature branches? *)
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> In the past we had the following:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> DEV300 = master/trunk/head
>>>>>>>> This will never lead to a release
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> We're using Subversion, and nearly every svn repository across the
>>>>>>> planet names this "trunk". Unless there is a specific reason to vary
>>>>>>> from that, I don't see why we'd want to name the directory "DEV300".
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> OOO340 = branch
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Branched from a specific DEV300 milestone to stablize the code when
>>>>>>>> coming
>>>>>>>> closer to a specific release (here: OOo 3.4)
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Branches can be named whatever we'd like. My own preference would
>>>>>>> be
>>>>>>> to call this: /branches/3.4.x
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The "OOO" is awfully redundant, and the last digit ("0") doesn't make
>>>>>>> sense since we would be releasing patches from the branch such as
>>>>>>> 3.4.1. The "3.4.x" naming is used by many products, and it has worked
>>>>>>> out very well.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>
>
> --
> *Alexandro Colorado*
> *OpenOffice.org* Español
> http://es.openoffice.org
>
>
--
*Alexandro Colorado*
*OpenOffice.org* Español
http://es.openoffice.org
Re: Naming of trunk and feature branches
Posted by Alexandro Colorado <jz...@openoffice.org>.
On Fri, Jul 1, 2011 at 10:13 AM, Marcus (OOo) <ma...@wtnet.de> wrote:
> Am 07/01/2011 04:56 PM, schrieb Alexandro Colorado:
>
> On Fri, Jul 1, 2011 at 9:46 AM, Marcus (OOo)<ma...@wtnet.de>
>> wrote:
>>
>> Am 06/30/2011 04:03 AM, schrieb Alexandro Colorado:
>>>
>>> On Wed, Jun 29, 2011 at 8:33 AM, Marcus (OOo)<ma...@wtnet.de>
>>>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Sorry, it seems I wasn't clear enough.
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> I don't think about how to name directories and files in the SVN repo
>>>>> itself. Sure we can stick with the schema like it is done in other
>>>>> projects.
>>>>> It's more a general thing how to present trunk and branches to the
>>>>> outside.
>>>>>
>>>>> E.g., when we release bits we have to make clear into which direction
>>>>> they
>>>>> point. It's a difference if we use a name like "branch 3.4.x" or tell
>>>>> the
>>>>> people it's "OOO 3.4.0" or maybe "AOOO 3.4.0".
>>>>>
>>>>> So, I don't think that a trailing 0 is not ? when it is the 3.4.0
>>>>> release.
>>>>> And the OOO is still necessary to show it's from our project. Of course
>>>>> it
>>>>> could be "AOOO" or whatever we will agree to.
>>>>>
>>>>> How to name the release files is another thing. There should be a clear
>>>>> structure to keep it simple and straight for scripts. But this is a
>>>>> topic
>>>>> for later.
>>>>>
>>>>> I hope it's more clear now. ;-)
>>>>>
>>>>> My bad also misconstruct the naming conversation. Well we used to have
>>>> different branches each with a name OOODEV was for the always
>>>> development
>>>> branch and OOO for the actual release branches.
>>>>
>>>
>>> I don't remember OOODEV as a name somewhere.
>>>
>>> So usually they got rid of the dots for clarity, and added a m for
>>>
>>>> milestone:
>>>> http://development.openoffice.org/releases/
>>>> and DEV:
>>>> http://development.openoffice.org/releases/dev_index.html
>>>>
>>>
>>> I'm sorry but I don't understand what you want to express with the both
>>> links. Please can you describe it in other words?
>>>
>>
>> I am pointing you to the naming of the branches and their dinamics. Isn't
>> that what you were addressing at first? Not sure what you mean by not
>>
>
> Yes, that's right.
>
>
> remembering OOODEV as a name, after you saw the link with the OOODEV
>> branch.
>>
>
> There is no OOODEV on the webpage. It's speaking about DEV and OOO
> milestones.
You sure? there is the unstable codeline:
http://development.openoffice.org/releases/dev_index.html#dev300
You dont get the OOO till the actual filename download. I guess it was
getting long.
>
>
> Marcus
>
>
>
> Am 06/29/2011 03:03 PM, schrieb Greg Stein:
>>>
>>>>
>>>>> On Wed, Jun 29, 2011 at 08:09, Marcus (OOo)<ma...@wtnet.de>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> With the discussions about the master and feature branches, the
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> following
>>>>>>> question comes to my mind.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> What about this naming schema for master and feature branches? *)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> In the past we had the following:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> DEV300 = master/trunk/head
>>>>>>> This will never lead to a release
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> We're using Subversion, and nearly every svn repository across the
>>>>>> planet names this "trunk". Unless there is a specific reason to vary
>>>>>> from that, I don't see why we'd want to name the directory "DEV300".
>>>>>>
>>>>>> OOO340 = branch
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Branched from a specific DEV300 milestone to stablize the code when
>>>>>>> coming
>>>>>>> closer to a specific release (here: OOo 3.4)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Branches can be named whatever we'd like. My own preference would be
>>>>>> to call this: /branches/3.4.x
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The "OOO" is awfully redundant, and the last digit ("0") doesn't make
>>>>>> sense since we would be releasing patches from the branch such as
>>>>>> 3.4.1. The "3.4.x" naming is used by many products, and it has worked
>>>>>> out very well.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
--
*Alexandro Colorado*
*OpenOffice.org* Español
http://es.openoffice.org
Re: Naming of trunk and feature branches
Posted by "Marcus (OOo)" <ma...@wtnet.de>.
Am 07/01/2011 04:56 PM, schrieb Alexandro Colorado:
> On Fri, Jul 1, 2011 at 9:46 AM, Marcus (OOo)<ma...@wtnet.de> wrote:
>
>> Am 06/30/2011 04:03 AM, schrieb Alexandro Colorado:
>>
>> On Wed, Jun 29, 2011 at 8:33 AM, Marcus (OOo)<ma...@wtnet.de>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Sorry, it seems I wasn't clear enough.
>>>>
>>>> I don't think about how to name directories and files in the SVN repo
>>>> itself. Sure we can stick with the schema like it is done in other
>>>> projects.
>>>> It's more a general thing how to present trunk and branches to the
>>>> outside.
>>>>
>>>> E.g., when we release bits we have to make clear into which direction
>>>> they
>>>> point. It's a difference if we use a name like "branch 3.4.x" or tell the
>>>> people it's "OOO 3.4.0" or maybe "AOOO 3.4.0".
>>>>
>>>> So, I don't think that a trailing 0 is not ? when it is the 3.4.0
>>>> release.
>>>> And the OOO is still necessary to show it's from our project. Of course
>>>> it
>>>> could be "AOOO" or whatever we will agree to.
>>>>
>>>> How to name the release files is another thing. There should be a clear
>>>> structure to keep it simple and straight for scripts. But this is a topic
>>>> for later.
>>>>
>>>> I hope it's more clear now. ;-)
>>>>
>>> My bad also misconstruct the naming conversation. Well we used to have
>>> different branches each with a name OOODEV was for the always development
>>> branch and OOO for the actual release branches.
>>
>> I don't remember OOODEV as a name somewhere.
>>
>> So usually they got rid of the dots for clarity, and added a m for
>>> milestone:
>>> http://development.openoffice.org/releases/
>>> and DEV:
>>> http://development.openoffice.org/releases/dev_index.html
>>
>> I'm sorry but I don't understand what you want to express with the both
>> links. Please can you describe it in other words?
>
> I am pointing you to the naming of the branches and their dinamics. Isn't
> that what you were addressing at first? Not sure what you mean by not
Yes, that's right.
> remembering OOODEV as a name, after you saw the link with the OOODEV branch.
There is no OOODEV on the webpage. It's speaking about DEV and OOO
milestones.
Marcus
>> Am 06/29/2011 03:03 PM, schrieb Greg Stein:
>>>>
>>>> On Wed, Jun 29, 2011 at 08:09, Marcus (OOo)<ma...@wtnet.de>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> With the discussions about the master and feature branches, the
>>>>>> following
>>>>>> question comes to my mind.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> What about this naming schema for master and feature branches? *)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> In the past we had the following:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> DEV300 = master/trunk/head
>>>>>> This will never lead to a release
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>> We're using Subversion, and nearly every svn repository across the
>>>>> planet names this "trunk". Unless there is a specific reason to vary
>>>>> from that, I don't see why we'd want to name the directory "DEV300".
>>>>>
>>>>> OOO340 = branch
>>>>>
>>>>>> Branched from a specific DEV300 milestone to stablize the code when
>>>>>> coming
>>>>>> closer to a specific release (here: OOo 3.4)
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>> Branches can be named whatever we'd like. My own preference would be
>>>>> to call this: /branches/3.4.x
>>>>>
>>>>> The "OOO" is awfully redundant, and the last digit ("0") doesn't make
>>>>> sense since we would be releasing patches from the branch such as
>>>>> 3.4.1. The "3.4.x" naming is used by many products, and it has worked
>>>>> out very well.
Re: Naming of trunk and feature branches
Posted by Alexandro Colorado <jz...@openoffice.org>.
On Fri, Jul 1, 2011 at 9:46 AM, Marcus (OOo) <ma...@wtnet.de> wrote:
> Am 06/30/2011 04:03 AM, schrieb Alexandro Colorado:
>
> On Wed, Jun 29, 2011 at 8:33 AM, Marcus (OOo)<ma...@wtnet.de>
>> wrote:
>>
>> Sorry, it seems I wasn't clear enough.
>>>
>>> I don't think about how to name directories and files in the SVN repo
>>> itself. Sure we can stick with the schema like it is done in other
>>> projects.
>>> It's more a general thing how to present trunk and branches to the
>>> outside.
>>>
>>> E.g., when we release bits we have to make clear into which direction
>>> they
>>> point. It's a difference if we use a name like "branch 3.4.x" or tell the
>>> people it's "OOO 3.4.0" or maybe "AOOO 3.4.0".
>>>
>>> So, I don't think that a trailing 0 is not ? when it is the 3.4.0
>>> release.
>>> And the OOO is still necessary to show it's from our project. Of course
>>> it
>>> could be "AOOO" or whatever we will agree to.
>>>
>>> How to name the release files is another thing. There should be a clear
>>> structure to keep it simple and straight for scripts. But this is a topic
>>> for later.
>>>
>>> I hope it's more clear now. ;-)
>>>
>>>
>> My bad also misconstruct the naming conversation. Well we used to have
>> different branches each with a name OOODEV was for the always development
>> branch and OOO for the actual release branches.
>>
>
> I don't remember OOODEV as a name somewhere.
>
>
> So usually they got rid of the dots for clarity, and added a m for
>> milestone:
>> http://development.openoffice.org/releases/
>> and DEV:
>> http://development.openoffice.org/releases/dev_index.html
>>
>
> I'm sorry but I don't understand what you want to express with the both
> links. Please can you describe it in other words?
>
I am pointing you to the naming of the branches and their dinamics. Isn't
that what you were addressing at first? Not sure what you mean by not
remembering OOODEV as a name, after you saw the link with the OOODEV branch.
>
> Thanks
>
>
> Marcus
>
>
>
> Am 06/29/2011 03:03 PM, schrieb Greg Stein:
>>>
>>> On Wed, Jun 29, 2011 at 08:09, Marcus (OOo)<ma...@wtnet.de>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> With the discussions about the master and feature branches, the
>>>>> following
>>>>> question comes to my mind.
>>>>>
>>>>> What about this naming schema for master and feature branches? *)
>>>>>
>>>>> In the past we had the following:
>>>>>
>>>>> DEV300 = master/trunk/head
>>>>> This will never lead to a release
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> We're using Subversion, and nearly every svn repository across the
>>>> planet names this "trunk". Unless there is a specific reason to vary
>>>> from that, I don't see why we'd want to name the directory "DEV300".
>>>>
>>>> OOO340 = branch
>>>>
>>>>> Branched from a specific DEV300 milestone to stablize the code when
>>>>> coming
>>>>> closer to a specific release (here: OOo 3.4)
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> Branches can be named whatever we'd like. My own preference would be
>>>> to call this: /branches/3.4.x
>>>>
>>>> The "OOO" is awfully redundant, and the last digit ("0") doesn't make
>>>> sense since we would be releasing patches from the branch such as
>>>> 3.4.1. The "3.4.x" naming is used by many products, and it has worked
>>>> out very well.
>>>>
>>>
--
*Alexandro Colorado*
*OpenOffice.org* Español
http://es.openoffice.org
Re: Naming of trunk and feature branches
Posted by "Marcus (OOo)" <ma...@wtnet.de>.
Am 06/30/2011 04:03 AM, schrieb Alexandro Colorado:
> On Wed, Jun 29, 2011 at 8:33 AM, Marcus (OOo)<ma...@wtnet.de> wrote:
>
>> Sorry, it seems I wasn't clear enough.
>>
>> I don't think about how to name directories and files in the SVN repo
>> itself. Sure we can stick with the schema like it is done in other projects.
>> It's more a general thing how to present trunk and branches to the outside.
>>
>> E.g., when we release bits we have to make clear into which direction they
>> point. It's a difference if we use a name like "branch 3.4.x" or tell the
>> people it's "OOO 3.4.0" or maybe "AOOO 3.4.0".
>>
>> So, I don't think that a trailing 0 is not ? when it is the 3.4.0 release.
>> And the OOO is still necessary to show it's from our project. Of course it
>> could be "AOOO" or whatever we will agree to.
>>
>> How to name the release files is another thing. There should be a clear
>> structure to keep it simple and straight for scripts. But this is a topic
>> for later.
>>
>> I hope it's more clear now. ;-)
>>
>
> My bad also misconstruct the naming conversation. Well we used to have
> different branches each with a name OOODEV was for the always development
> branch and OOO for the actual release branches.
I don't remember OOODEV as a name somewhere.
> So usually they got rid of the dots for clarity, and added a m for
> milestone:
> http://development.openoffice.org/releases/
> and DEV:
> http://development.openoffice.org/releases/dev_index.html
I'm sorry but I don't understand what you want to express with the both
links. Please can you describe it in other words?
Thanks
Marcus
>> Am 06/29/2011 03:03 PM, schrieb Greg Stein:
>>
>> On Wed, Jun 29, 2011 at 08:09, Marcus (OOo)<ma...@wtnet.de> wrote:
>>>
>>>> With the discussions about the master and feature branches, the following
>>>> question comes to my mind.
>>>>
>>>> What about this naming schema for master and feature branches? *)
>>>>
>>>> In the past we had the following:
>>>>
>>>> DEV300 = master/trunk/head
>>>> This will never lead to a release
>>>>
>>>
>>> We're using Subversion, and nearly every svn repository across the
>>> planet names this "trunk". Unless there is a specific reason to vary
>>> from that, I don't see why we'd want to name the directory "DEV300".
>>>
>>> OOO340 = branch
>>>> Branched from a specific DEV300 milestone to stablize the code when
>>>> coming
>>>> closer to a specific release (here: OOo 3.4)
>>>>
>>>
>>> Branches can be named whatever we'd like. My own preference would be
>>> to call this: /branches/3.4.x
>>>
>>> The "OOO" is awfully redundant, and the last digit ("0") doesn't make
>>> sense since we would be releasing patches from the branch such as
>>> 3.4.1. The "3.4.x" naming is used by many products, and it has worked
>>> out very well.
Re: Naming of trunk and feature branches
Posted by Alexandro Colorado <jz...@openoffice.org>.
On Wed, Jun 29, 2011 at 8:33 AM, Marcus (OOo) <ma...@wtnet.de> wrote:
> Sorry, it seems I wasn't clear enough.
>
> I don't think about how to name directories and files in the SVN repo
> itself. Sure we can stick with the schema like it is done in other projects.
> It's more a general thing how to present trunk and branches to the outside.
>
> E.g., when we release bits we have to make clear into which direction they
> point. It's a difference if we use a name like "branch 3.4.x" or tell the
> people it's "OOO 3.4.0" or maybe "AOOO 3.4.0".
>
> So, I don't think that a trailing 0 is not ? when it is the 3.4.0 release.
> And the OOO is still necessary to show it's from our project. Of course it
> could be "AOOO" or whatever we will agree to.
>
> How to name the release files is another thing. There should be a clear
> structure to keep it simple and straight for scripts. But this is a topic
> for later.
>
> I hope it's more clear now. ;-)
>
My bad also misconstruct the naming conversation. Well we used to have
different branches each with a name OOODEV was for the always development
branch and OOO for the actual release branches.
So usually they got rid of the dots for clarity, and added a m for
milestone:
http://development.openoffice.org/releases/
and DEV:
http://development.openoffice.org/releases/dev_index.html
>
> Marcus
>
>
>
> Am 06/29/2011 03:03 PM, schrieb Greg Stein:
>
> On Wed, Jun 29, 2011 at 08:09, Marcus (OOo)<ma...@wtnet.de> wrote:
>>
>>> With the discussions about the master and feature branches, the following
>>> question comes to my mind.
>>>
>>> What about this naming schema for master and feature branches? *)
>>>
>>> In the past we had the following:
>>>
>>> DEV300 = master/trunk/head
>>> This will never lead to a release
>>>
>>
>> We're using Subversion, and nearly every svn repository across the
>> planet names this "trunk". Unless there is a specific reason to vary
>> from that, I don't see why we'd want to name the directory "DEV300".
>>
>> OOO340 = branch
>>> Branched from a specific DEV300 milestone to stablize the code when
>>> coming
>>> closer to a specific release (here: OOo 3.4)
>>>
>>
>> Branches can be named whatever we'd like. My own preference would be
>> to call this: /branches/3.4.x
>>
>> The "OOO" is awfully redundant, and the last digit ("0") doesn't make
>> sense since we would be releasing patches from the branch such as
>> 3.4.1. The "3.4.x" naming is used by many products, and it has worked
>> out very well.
>>
>
>
--
*Alexandro Colorado*
*OpenOffice.org* Español
http://es.openoffice.org
Re: Naming of trunk and feature branches
Posted by "Marcus (OOo)" <ma...@wtnet.de>.
Sorry, it seems I wasn't clear enough.
I don't think about how to name directories and files in the SVN repo
itself. Sure we can stick with the schema like it is done in other
projects. It's more a general thing how to present trunk and branches to
the outside.
E.g., when we release bits we have to make clear into which direction
they point. It's a difference if we use a name like "branch 3.4.x" or
tell the people it's "OOO 3.4.0" or maybe "AOOO 3.4.0".
So, I don't think that a trailing 0 is not ? when it is the 3.4.0
release. And the OOO is still necessary to show it's from our project.
Of course it could be "AOOO" or whatever we will agree to.
How to name the release files is another thing. There should be a clear
structure to keep it simple and straight for scripts. But this is a
topic for later.
I hope it's more clear now. ;-)
Marcus
Am 06/29/2011 03:03 PM, schrieb Greg Stein:
> On Wed, Jun 29, 2011 at 08:09, Marcus (OOo)<ma...@wtnet.de> wrote:
>> With the discussions about the master and feature branches, the following
>> question comes to my mind.
>>
>> What about this naming schema for master and feature branches? *)
>>
>> In the past we had the following:
>>
>> DEV300 = master/trunk/head
>> This will never lead to a release
>
> We're using Subversion, and nearly every svn repository across the
> planet names this "trunk". Unless there is a specific reason to vary
> from that, I don't see why we'd want to name the directory "DEV300".
>
>> OOO340 = branch
>> Branched from a specific DEV300 milestone to stablize the code when coming
>> closer to a specific release (here: OOo 3.4)
>
> Branches can be named whatever we'd like. My own preference would be
> to call this: /branches/3.4.x
>
> The "OOO" is awfully redundant, and the last digit ("0") doesn't make
> sense since we would be releasing patches from the branch such as
> 3.4.1. The "3.4.x" naming is used by many products, and it has worked
> out very well.
Re: Naming of trunk and feature branches
Posted by Greg Stein <gs...@gmail.com>.
On Wed, Jun 29, 2011 at 08:09, Marcus (OOo) <ma...@wtnet.de> wrote:
> With the discussions about the master and feature branches, the following
> question comes to my mind.
>
> What about this naming schema for master and feature branches? *)
>
> In the past we had the following:
>
> DEV300 = master/trunk/head
> This will never lead to a release
We're using Subversion, and nearly every svn repository across the
planet names this "trunk". Unless there is a specific reason to vary
from that, I don't see why we'd want to name the directory "DEV300".
> OOO340 = branch
> Branched from a specific DEV300 milestone to stablize the code when coming
> closer to a specific release (here: OOo 3.4)
Branches can be named whatever we'd like. My own preference would be
to call this: /branches/3.4.x
The "OOO" is awfully redundant, and the last digit ("0") doesn't make
sense since we would be releasing patches from the branch such as
3.4.1. The "3.4.x" naming is used by many products, and it has worked
out very well.
>...
Cheers,
-g