[Mitgcm-support] Re: Release1 branch

[mitgcm-support at dev.mitgcm.org]

Chris Hill wrote:
> I don't think we want tutorial_examples to be part of "checkpoint"
> downloads - do we?

The problem is that the tuts get out of sync with the corresponding
verification. If both tuts and verifs in the development trunk then
we have less of an excuse to change the code in a way that breaks
a tut.
 
> Also isn't it slightly odd to have a branch called "release1".

Yes but someone had already used up the name "release1-branch" and
I didn't want to break their checked-out codes.

>                                                    That means if
> I type "cvs co -r release1" I get the HEAD of the branch. Is that what
> we want? The original plan was  to create tags on release1-branch called
> ...

Infact, it does work if the branch is never left in an un-tagged state.
But that's not why I did it. I did it because release1 was the only
simple tag available.

> Anyhow - nice diagram, but why didn't you just create a tag
> called relese1-beta2 on release1-branch!

Thanks. Release1-branch already exists and release1-beta2 is
going to contain more than c44.

A.