_craig wrote:
Do I really need to have a separate DRUPAL-5 branch for my contributed module? The documentation* seems to indicate I need to. Is anything preventing me from just tagging files under HEAD with DRUPAL-5--1-0? Right now and in the near future I will only be making changes for 5.x so I don't see the need to have a separate branch. Of course if you look at my module**, it's too late...
The explicit branching really helps those of us who are using CVS to keep the modules up to date on ANY version of drupal we run. There might not be a ton of us but we are the first line of defense against bugs and the most likely creators of patches to resolve them before the release gets tagged. Without explicit branching we would really need to check with the developer (or CVS commit messages hopefully if the developer is nice) to see if he/she has "internally branched" the module towards the next drupal version yet. I recognize the perceived double effort and i can only offer this as a response: If you would like to develop on the HEAD and only occasionally port your changes back to the 5_0 branch for bug fix releases and new features worth the effort, then we as CVS updating developers wold be much happier "occasionally" needing to interrogate HEAD if we need cutting edge code. I'm not intentionally speaking for everyone here but i would like to know if others agree. Im saying i'd rather be behind the curve a little as opposed to having to CONSTANTLY monitor the changes being made to the HEAD. Assuming that we all USE more modules than we DEVELOP this would hopefully represent a much smaller workload for all of us. If someone would like me to manage this task for their module id be happy to do the thankless job on any module I use personally or professionally (it's a long list). Thoughts? -- Michael Favia michael@favias.org tel. 512.585.5650 http://michael.favias.org