Alternatively, you could just rename the branches to
• svn_branches/0.0.7M1-Validation • svn_branches/0.10.X_core • svn_branches/branches
etc. This tucks them all away under a "svn_branches" folder in most Git UIs where they will be harmless. I would rather not make it difficult for people to find old history; tags add an extra step to the discovery process.
Incidentally, I like the way in which the CDO project manages branches, in particular committers' 'private' branches for their own experimental/sandbox work. We might consider adopting a similar scheme.
cW
Sent from my iPad
Hi
In GIT, if you tag the 'removed' branches, they should still be
accessible.
Regards
Ed Willink
On 28/08/2013 09:34, LETAVERNIER Camille wrote:
Hi,
I will also remove some branches from the
repository. The following branches will be removed:
-
0.0.7M1-Validation
-
0.10.X_core
-
branches
-
cdo_kepler
-
coreRefactor
-
helios-migration
-
resourceLoading
All version branches will be kept (0.7.X ->
0.10.X, including 0.8.X-EYY), as well as the
work-in-progress branches.
This will also be done at the end of this week
(Friday).
Regards,
Camille
Hi Team,
We will create the maintenance branch for
Papyrus 0.10.X at the end of this week (Friday the 30th).
Cheers,
Rémi
-------------------------------------------------------
Rémi SCHNEKENBURGER
+33 (0)1 69 08 48 48
CEA Saclay Nano-INNOV
Institut
CARNOT CEA LIST
<mime-attachment.png>www.eclipse.org/papyrus
Actually, the end of August should be OK
for me. I should be wrapping up the first feature on my plan
by then, so I should be able to hold on to it locally until
master is converted.
Hi Christian,
You’re right for the next 1.0 being on the
master branch. We did not have in mind any new
developments during summer for next version of Papyrus.
We are focusing on bug fixes, and did not want to merge
only bug fixes from branch 0.10.X to master branch with
no developments on master branch.
At the end of August, we will probably
create this branch.
Does that sound good for you, or do you
need to push some new developments right now on master ?
Cheers
Rémi
-------------------------------------------------------
Rémi SCHNEKENBURGER
+33 (0)1 69 08 48 48
CEA Saclay Nano-INNOV
Institut
CARNOT CEA LIST
<image001.png>www.eclipse.org/papyrus
Thanks, Sébastien.
Next question: I don't see any
0.10.1 or 0.10.x maintenance builds in Hudson, and the
0.10.x_core branch in Git has no commits since 5
February, when the repo was in SVN. It seems that
development targeting the Papyrus 0.10.1 (Kepler SR1)
release is being done on the master branch, which seems
wrong. The master should be for new development
targeting Luna, no? Otherwise, how can I start on new
features for Luna M2 and M3 milestones?
Nest release of Papyrus will be
1.0.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
+33
(0)1 69 08 58 24 / +33(0)6 88 20 00 47
DILS/Laboratoire d’Ingénierie
dirigée par les modèles pour les Systèmes
Embarqués (LISE),
91 191
Gif sur Yvette CEDEX
I have
entered some plan items into Bugzilla for
enhancements to the CDO integration in
Papyrus that I intend to contribute in the
Luna release:
The PMI
for Papyrus [2] does not appear to have a
Luna release record, yet. Will the next
release be 0.11 or 1.0? I see that Bugzilla
does not have a 0.11 release, but it has a
1.0 release, although it also has several
that don't make sense for Papyrus (e.g.,
2.4, 3.1), so I'm not sure that this means
anything.
_______________________________________________
mdt-papyrus.dev mailing list
mdt-papyrus.dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/mdt-papyrus.dev
_______________________________________________
mdt-papyrus.dev mailing list
mdt-papyrus.dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/mdt-papyrus.dev
No virus
found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 2013.0.3392 / Virus Database: 3211/6614 - Release Date:
08/27/13
|
