RFC: icedtea-cacao branch vs. clone

[Lillian Angel]

Mark Wielaard wrote:
> Hi Christian,
> 
> On Wed, 2007-09-05 at 16:21 +0200, Christian Thalinger wrote:
>> We're planing to set up a IcedTea repository that has all necessary
>> patches to run with CACAO as VM.  These patches include one or two
>> patches for the OpenJDK build system and a patch we need for the binary
>> wrappers from OpenJDK because of a problem with Boehm-GC.
>>
>> We should now decide what is better to use, a named branch or a seperate
>> clone.  I'm, personally, in favor for a named branch, as merging with
>> the default branch is very easy and we have a full history of all
>> changes ever done in one single repository.
>>
>> Other opinions?
> 
> We are still learning how to most effectively use mercurial as a group.
> Personally I would have expected more people to just make clones of
> icedtea and publish their own repos. But clearly people seem to like the
> one shared repo approach even though technically that isn't really
> necessary.
> 
> Since we are using a shared published repo at the time I think it makes
> sense to go for a named branch in that one IF the intent is to merge
> that branch eventually with the default one. Is the idea that
> icedtea-cacao eventually just becomes a configure option for icedtea
> proper?

Yes, this is the idea. I think it would be best to have a named branch.

Lillian