|
From: | Daniel J Sebald |
Subject: | Re: No |
Date: | Fri, 30 Jan 2015 19:59:39 -0600 |
User-agent: | Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:1.9.2.24) Gecko/20111108 Fedora/3.1.16-1.fc14 Thunderbird/3.1.16 |
On 01/30/2015 07:40 PM, Michael Godfrey wrote:
On 01/30/2015 05:07 PM, Daniel J Sebald wrote:Windows development: Maybe a separate branch for that, say, "windows-install" branchTime ti just put a stop to this. Remember the GU branch?
There's nothing inherently wrong with branches, so long as things are kept separate. The problems arose in this case because of the periodic merging of branches. John wouldn't have made the mistake of putting Qt print code in the default branch had the GUI remained separate all along because his Qt code wouldn't have compiled or worked in the default branch.
If the Windows code goes into the default branch at the onset and is in a constant flux it could mean a higher version release rate if you want people with Windows access to test. But that means everything in default branch needs to be robust when there could be other development things going on.
Dan
[Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread] |