From: David Abrahams (dave_at_[hidden])
Date: 2008-06-22 21:14:58
James Sharpe wrote:
> You see its this lack of flexibility and clarity that naming a branch
> release brings. I refer you to my earlier suggestion of including the
> release number in the branch name to remove ambiguity and make it
> easier to create for example 1.35.1 whilst release 1.36.0 is in
> progress since it is clear where fixes should go.
I agree with this suggestion. Naming the branch "release" does seem a
bit like needless invention where an industry-standard practice would do
the job better. Am I missing something?
-- Dave Abrahams BoostPro Computing http://www.boostpro.com
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk