On 1/23/07, Earl Miles <merlin@logrus.com> wrote:
Well, there are people who cvs update from the DRUPAL-5 tag, which means they can't get your module. I had a bug posted to my issue queue about that. I'm not sure how I feel about it. Maintaining 2 branches when you only support one Drupal version is a serious pain, IMO, and it's beyond a lot of developers.
I feel the same way. And if you're trying to keep track of bug fixes for 4.7 that leaves you with two branches and HEAD. I guess the realistic way to do it would be develop live on HEAD and then back port to the DRUPAL-5 branch.
andrew morton wrote:
I feel the same way. And if you're trying to keep track of bug fixes for 4.7 that leaves you with two branches and HEAD. I guess the realistic way to do it would be develop live on HEAD and then back port to the DRUPAL-5 branch.
But, why bother updating HEAD at all? If a module has no Drupal 6 development going on, can't all updates be made just to DRUPAL-5, and HEAD ignored? I got the impression that single-Drupal-version development of a module could confine all its updates to the one branch.. If someone tells CVS "give me the DRUPAL-5 branch", they'll always get the latest thing in that branch unless they specify a release tag, right? -Edgar