Re: Next release from master

[Xue Fuqiao]

On Fri, Jan 22, 2016 at 9:42 AM, Paul Eggert <address@hidden> wrote:
> On 01/21/2016 05:28 PM, Dmitry Gutov wrote:
>>
>> Why not get back to the simpler scheme?
>
> I also don't see the need for three common development branches. Emacs
> developers are already spread pretty thin with two.
>
> I know of a GNU project that has three such branches: Automake. The branches
> are called 'master', 'minor', and 'micro', and have roughly the three roles
> that John suggested. My own impression is that the extra complexity of the
> three branches discouraged contributors ("which branch should this patch go
> into?", that sort of thing).
>
> Automake development is currently moribund.

+1

I think the current process (as described in `admin/release-process' and
`admin/notes/versioning') is good enough.  More complexity will
discourage current/potential contributors.