[rspec-users] Am I missing something with Heckle?
dchelimsky at gmail.com
Wed Oct 31 11:09:40 EDT 2007
On Oct 31, 2007 9:56 AM, Wincent Colaiuta <win at wincent.com> wrote:
> El 31/10/2007, a las 15:40, "David Chelimsky" <dchelimsky at gmail.com>
> Recently with all of the activity on the story runner front I've
> thought that RSpec could benefit from a slightly more "branched"
> development process. At the moment it appears that *all* development
> activity occurs on the trunk, which means that when there are long
> periods between releases you have no choice but to live with the old
> version or sit on the bleeding edge.
> If RSpec had a "development" and "maintenance" branch (or "stable" and
> "devel"; "master" and "maint"; call them what you will) then it would
> be easier to contemplate intermediate maintenance releases while
> working on big new features which take a long time to get "baked in",
> like the story runner.
> As an example, consider how the Rails 2.0 preview release came out and
> the trunk wasn't really ready to have a release cut from it for
> compatibility, so people have had to follow the trunk. It would have
> been nice to be able to cut a 1.0.9 release from a maintenance branch
> If the suckiness of Subversion's merge functionality is a problem then
> RSpec should consider moving to a different SCM, or at least layering
> one on top of the existing Subversion repo (ie. "the" Subversion repo
> continues to be the centralized distribution point, but the devs do
> the "real work" using Git).
Please start new conversations with a new subject. This is unrelated
to the heckle problem and deserves a thread of its own.
I responded (in a new thread) on the rspec-devel list, which is the
appropriate home for discussions about dev process:
More information about the rspec-users