Re: New branch

[Stefan Monnier <monnier@IRO.UMontreal.CA>]

> ... for the people that at that time have branches of `trunk' and
> `pending', if they do not adjust their reference branches to match the
> change, they can get confused: the lesser problem is the disappearance
> of `pending', which it is just an annoyance, but `trunk' suddendly
> taking the role of the former `pending' branch can be a bit disturbing,
> as you are switching roles, and if someone does not notice it, he can
> commit to the "new" `trunk' something intended for the "old" trunk.

trunk wouldn't take the role of the pending branch: it would take the
content of the pending branch but keep its role of "where development is
focused", so I don't think there's any problem.  It matches previous CVS
pratice in this regard.

> In the future, I suggest creating branches with a name that conveys its
> purpose (trunk can be the perennial development branch, then we would
> have `emacs-XX.X', etc) and keep those names forever. This requires
> almost no housekeeping on the developers part, except for cloning
> emacs-XX.X when it is created, which is much simpler than adjusting
> branch references.

When I tried to do that, I bumped into the problem that I can't have
a symlink "trunk" pointing to the "emacs-23" branch (because
bzr.sv.gnu.org's http server doesn't honor symlinks).


        Stefan