Re: [matplotlib-devel] 98.4 maintenance branch

It looks like there was a slight "oops" making the branch.

https://matplotlib.svn.sourceforge.net/svnroot/matplotlib/branches/ 
<https://matplotlib.svn.sourceforge.net/svnroot/matplotlib/branches/%5C>v0_98_4_maint

points to one level above the source tree.  See:

http://matplotlib.svn.sourceforge.net/viewvc/matplotlib/branches/v0_98_4_maint/

Was this intentional?

In any case, the svnmerge setup I did this morning is incorrect.  Would 
you like me to fix that, or would you rather remove and recreate the 
branch?  If we don't fix the branch, I would suggest changing the 
instructions for checking out the branch to:

svn co 
https://matplotlib.svn.sourceforge.net/svnroot/matplotlib/branches/ 
<https://matplotlib.svn.sourceforge.net/svnroot/matplotlib/branches/%5C>v0_98_4_maint/matplotlib 
mpl98.4

Cheers,
Mike

John Hunter wrote:
>
> On Wed, Dec 10, 2008 at 11:30 AM, Michael Droettboom <md...@st... 
> <mailto:md...@st...>> wrote:
>
>
>     This will make merging slightly easier, (since the -S parameter is
>     not required), and it is generally good practice in the long run
>     to not keep extra branches lying around.  I'm happy to make this
>     change, but thought I'd run it by you first -- it means we're
>     effectively abandoning the 0.91.x series, or at least saying any
>     bugfixes to it will have to be manually brought over to 0.98.x.
>
>
> Thanks for the notes -- I'l incorporate them into the dev guide.
>
> I definitely do not want to abandon the 91 branch.  I expect this 
> branch to last a while, perhaps a year.  the 98.4 branch is intended 
> to be short lived, order of a week or two, just to fix critical bugs 
> for this release.  Or better yet, we keep it alive until the next 
> point release, then kill it and make a new release branch.  That way 
> if we ever need to fix a critical bug in the latest release, we can go 
> to the branch w/o having all the testing required on the head.  Since 
> the major incompatibility was between 91 and 98, I anticipate that 
> there are some users with a lot of code (eg an axes3d dependency) 
> where moving may never be feasible.
>
> JDH