[s1] Porting to 1.3 Branch

[Niall Pemberton <ni...@gmail.com>]

We seem to be getting in a habit of making changes to the 1.3 Branch
and leaving them out of the trunk. Personally I think this is a bad
idea for two reasons:

1) they may get forgotten - and we release a change in 1.3 thats then
is effectively revereted when 1.4 comes out.

2) theres always the danger that someone comes along and makes larger
changes that make porting more difficult

I also think this is the wrong way round - we should be applying
changes to the trunk and then back-porting them to the 1.3 branch (if
required). For me the most up to date copy should if possible be the
trunk and its better to apply and test changes there first.

Niall

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@struts.apache.org

Re: [s1] Porting to 1.3 Branch

[Paul Benedict <pb...@apache.org>]

Martin Cooper wrote:
> IMHO, the root of the problem is that we branched S1 prematurely. If we
> don't think we're done with the 1.3 code line yet, then we shouldn't have
> branched it. Maybe I've not been paying enough attention, but I 
> haven't seen
> much development going on in trunk yet, and without that, there's no good
> reason for two code lines.
1.3 was branched so new 1.4 development could go on, and it has. 
Multiple new features have been checked in which would be inappropriate 
for patch releases.

Paul

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@struts.apache.org

Re: [s1] Porting to 1.3 Branch

[Martin Cooper <ma...@apache.org>]

On 4/16/07, Niall Pemberton <ni...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> We seem to be getting in a habit of making changes to the 1.3 Branch
> and leaving them out of the trunk. Personally I think this is a bad
> idea for two reasons:
>
> 1) they may get forgotten - and we release a change in 1.3 thats then
> is effectively revereted when 1.4 comes out.
>
> 2) theres always the danger that someone comes along and makes larger
> changes that make porting more difficult
>
> I also think this is the wrong way round - we should be applying
> changes to the trunk and then back-porting them to the 1.3 branch (if
> required). For me the most up to date copy should if possible be the
> trunk and its better to apply and test changes there first.


I agree with this. Ongoing development leads the way, and if issues are
found, they can be backported if necessary.

IMHO, the root of the problem is that we branched S1 prematurely. If we
don't think we're done with the 1.3 code line yet, then we shouldn't have
branched it. Maybe I've not been paying enough attention, but I haven't seen
much development going on in trunk yet, and without that, there's no good
reason for two code lines.

--
Martin Cooper


Niall
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@struts.apache.org
>
>

Re: [s1] Porting to 1.3 Branch

[Henri Yandell <fl...@gmail.com>]

On 4/17/07, Antonio Petrelli <an...@gmail.com> wrote:
> 2007/4/17, Niall Pemberton <ni...@gmail.com>:
> > We seem to be getting in a habit of making changes to the 1.3 Branch
> > and leaving them out of the trunk. Personally I think this is a bad
> > idea...
>
> I agree, every changes, especially bug fixes, should be ported and
> tested immediately in the trunk.
>
> > I also think this is the wrong way round - we should be applying
> > changes to the trunk and then back-porting them to the 1.3 branch (if
> > required). For me the most up to date copy should if possible be the
> > trunk and its better to apply and test changes there first.
>
> Here I disagree: if a bug affects a version of the 1.3 branch, the bug
> must be fixed in the branch, then verified if in the trunk exists and,
> eventually, fix it and test it.

+1 o both. I'll go ahead and merge 1.3's changes onto 1.4 today and
then if people are agreeable we can continue on by applying fixes to
1.3 against 1.4 at the same time, and 1.4 specific things go onto 1.4
and not 1.3.

Hen

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@struts.apache.org

Re: [s1] Porting to 1.3 Branch

[Ted Husted <hu...@apache.org>]

On 4/17/07, Antonio Petrelli <an...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Here I disagree: if a bug affects a version of the 1.3 branch, the bug
> must be fixed in the branch, then verified if in the trunk exists and,
> eventually, fix it and test it.

Historically, we have considered the trunk the active line of
development. ATM, we have active branches in both Struts 1 and Struts
2. But, in both cases, I believe we still consider the trunk the
one-true-codebase. In effect, 1.3.x and 2.0.x are maintenance
branches.

My understanding is that the branches were created as temporary
expediencies while we develop brave new features for the trunk. Once
the trunk is ready for release, the branches would become inactive,
unless a serious (e.g. security) flaw is uncovered.

When we create a maintenance branch, it would seem to be rare for a
bug to affect the branch and not the trunk, since the trunk is a
superset of the branch

I'd say the fix should be tested against both the branch and the
trunk. At least, that's what I've, and I believe others, have been
doing wth 2.0 and 2.1.x (

I suppose we could wait and try and merge a branch into the trunk
later, but I would be concerned that some fixes might not be
compatible with the whatever brave new changes we are making to the
trunk, implying the fixes should be tried one-by-one or at least in
small batches, before the branch is released again.

-Ted.

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@struts.apache.org

Re: [s1] Porting to 1.3 Branch

[Antonio Petrelli <an...@gmail.com>]

2007/4/17, Niall Pemberton <ni...@gmail.com>:
> We seem to be getting in a habit of making changes to the 1.3 Branch
> and leaving them out of the trunk. Personally I think this is a bad
> idea...

I agree, every changes, especially bug fixes, should be ported and
tested immediately in the trunk.

> I also think this is the wrong way round - we should be applying
> changes to the trunk and then back-porting them to the 1.3 branch (if
> required). For me the most up to date copy should if possible be the
> trunk and its better to apply and test changes there first.

Here I disagree: if a bug affects a version of the 1.3 branch, the bug
must be fixed in the branch, then verified if in the trunk exists and,
eventually, fix it and test it.

Antonio

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@struts.apache.org

Re: [s1] Porting to 1.3 Branch

[Niall Pemberton <ni...@gmail.com>]

On 4/17/07, Henri Yandell <fl...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I thought we were doing 1.3.9, then merging 1.3.9 onto the 1.4 trunk?

Maybe so - but still a bad idea IMO.

Niall

> Hen
>
> On 4/16/07, Niall Pemberton <ni...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > We seem to be getting in a habit of making changes to the 1.3 Branch
> > and leaving them out of the trunk. Personally I think this is a bad
> > idea for two reasons:
> >
> > 1) they may get forgotten - and we release a change in 1.3 thats then
> > is effectively revereted when 1.4 comes out.
> >
> > 2) theres always the danger that someone comes along and makes larger
> > changes that make porting more difficult
> >
> > I also think this is the wrong way round - we should be applying
> > changes to the trunk and then back-porting them to the 1.3 branch (if
> > required). For me the most up to date copy should if possible be the
> > trunk and its better to apply and test changes there first.
> >
> > Niall

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@struts.apache.org

Re: [s1] Porting to 1.3 Branch

[Henri Yandell <fl...@gmail.com>]

I thought we were doing 1.3.9, then merging 1.3.9 onto the 1.4 trunk?

Hen

On 4/16/07, Niall Pemberton <ni...@gmail.com> wrote:
> We seem to be getting in a habit of making changes to the 1.3 Branch
> and leaving them out of the trunk. Personally I think this is a bad
> idea for two reasons:
>
> 1) they may get forgotten - and we release a change in 1.3 thats then
> is effectively revereted when 1.4 comes out.
>
> 2) theres always the danger that someone comes along and makes larger
> changes that make porting more difficult
>
> I also think this is the wrong way round - we should be applying
> changes to the trunk and then back-porting them to the 1.3 branch (if
> required). For me the most up to date copy should if possible be the
> trunk and its better to apply and test changes there first.
>
> Niall
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@struts.apache.org
>
>

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@struts.apache.org