merging default into stable

[Matt Mackall]

On Wed, 2010-01-20 at 11:43 -0500, venizio krups wrote:
> hello list,
> 
> at work we run one repo with two named branches: default, and stable,
> and the workflow is similar to that of mercurial main tree. bugfixes,
> and known to be stable changes, go into the stable branch which then
> gets merged into default. we are now ready for the next major release
> which brings me to my question.  would it be better to merge default
> into stable, or to just tag default as released, and re-restart the
> stable branch later on when needed?

> what approach will mercurial take?

Good question. As part of our time-based release process, after we
freeze the code base, all work will take place on the stable branch. So
entering the code freeze, I'll probably merge default into stable. Then
for two weeks, we'll work on the stable branch, then tag 1.5. The first
non-development check-in post-1.5 will restart the default branch at the
1.5 tag.

-- 
http://selenic.com : development and support for Mercurial and Linux