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 2011/07/01 16:46:02 UTC
Re: Naming of trunk and feature branches
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 "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