[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [lwip-devel] devel vs stable cvs
From: |
Jani Monoses |
Subject: |
Re: [lwip-devel] devel vs stable cvs |
Date: |
Tue, 18 Nov 2003 13:03:59 +0200 |
> - Bug fixes are allowed in main.
> - Invasive changes, new features and bug fixes are allowed in DEVEL.
The question is when do those invasive changes reach main if only bugfixes are
allowed?
> My preference would be for everyone just testing DEVEL :-)
Mine too, and that would mean we don;t need stable only one CVS branch :)
> An alternative would be increased an frequency of merging. Unidirectional
> mergers can be automated by a Unix script, as long as the target (main)
Yes this would help, I was under the impression that since merges are
time-consuming
because you have to pick what you merge it's a PITA as you say.
OTOH if you _do not_ pick just automatically merge it's the same thing: stable
gets a bulk of unrelated changes and has to figure out what changed when.
Whereas with one change accompanied by a heads-up explaining it if it's
nontrivial on lwip-devel people can see what they update to. This might mean a
slower (can it get slower :) ???) rate of commits because of peer review but
then people would not be afraid of devel doing unexpected things.
Or we could do a poll on lwip-users asking that everybody take a minute and
answer what
he/she uses: latest release, CVS -stable, or CVS-devel? I have a feeling that
devel has around 5 users :)
Jani