[VOTE] Branching policy for 1.0

Hi, Sergiu said in an email he wanted to modify the branching policy for 1.0. So I'm proposing 2 choices and let you vote about them: Option 1 (current policy): ==================== * Work on trunk till we cut the RC. At that point in time create a branch Pros: * Simple. Minimal merging from branch to trunk to do. * No risk of forgetting something (like something is on trunk but not in branch where it should be, and no risk of forgetting to merge back on trunk something from the branch) Cons: * If someone introduces a big instability, we'll need to revert it * Committers cannot commit something not working on trunk (in any case nobody should ever do that) * If a new feature is committed that impacts other features, it's possible that it won't be stable enough. This is especially true as we don't have lots of automated tests to discover regression. Note: If we had strong automated tests we would never need to create a branch (this is how I do it on the Cargo project and I've never had any issue). Option 2: ======== * Create a 1.0 branch right now. All work leading to 1.0 must go to that branch. Trunk is for work for 1.1. Pros: * People working on 1.1 can do so on trunk * Less stabilization risk issues Cons: * Requires more discipline. People must be careful to commit on the right branch/trunk. * We absolutely need to merge to trunk whenever someone commits to the 1.0 branch as otherwise merging is a big pain later on. Please cast your votes. I'm +1 for Option 2 but provided all committers agree as it's a little bit more work and more importantly requires discipline. Thanks -Vincent ___________________________________________________________________________ Yahoo! Mail r�invente le mail ! D�couvrez le nouveau Yahoo! Mail et son interface r�volutionnaire. http://fr.mail.yahoo.com