blt/rabbit_common — comment on commit f5d513f9c1016977f6d6d56f74dc9803e126d681
File:  line 0
By blt:

> Not a ramble at all. :) Good thoughts all the way 'round.

Very kind of you.

> I like the idea of maintaining the "community" version and the strict version.
>
> Maybe we can maintain the unaltered sources in the master branch and track a patched, stricter version in a separate branch? Should each version upgrade be its own branch? Thus there would be the tagged version in master, which corresponds to the unaltered sources, then have the version-community branch being the patched one. That wouldn't be too hard to maintain, I don't think.

I like this idea. Smart tagging will make it even better: tag '2.7.1' points to commit that's straight from RabbitMQ, tag '2.7.1-community-20120214' points to a commit in branch '2.7.1-community' that has the more strict compiler options, dialyzer specs, etc. The exact tag and branch names don't matter so much, so long as its consistent. I _do_ like having the master branch point to the latest from upstream. That's a great idea.

---

I can get some pull requests to you for all of this in a few days, after some rest. I have succumbed to seasonal illness. :/