Re: version/infrastructure separation test ...

[Sven Luther <sven.luther@wanadoo.fr>]

On Wed, Nov 09, 2005 at 09:54:31AM +0000, Horms wrote:
> Sven Luther <sven.luther@wanadoo.fr> wrote:
> > On Wed, Nov 09, 2005 at 11:07:24AM +0900, Horms wrote:
> > 
> > Yes and no. The problem is that basically we have two different things, the
> > first one is the build infrastructure, which should really not be all that
> > different for each version, and which there is really no need to have a branch
> > per version from.
> > 
> > On the other hand, the per version configs and patches cannot be done without,
> > and thus should be hold in a different branch each.
> > 
> > This indeed adds some complexity (rather minimal though if done right), but on
> > the other hand it will keep the branching to the absolute minimum, and weren't
> > you the one complaining about too many branches ? 
> 
> Yes, though it doesn't decrease the number of branches, the number
> of non-infastructure branches remains the same, and additionally,
> we have a (sometimes branched) set of infastruture somewhere else.

Well, we can't avoid those version/dists branches at all, but there is really
no need to duplicate the infrastructure stuff all over.

Friendly,

Sven Luther