Re: Arch archive setup

[Andy Wingo]

Hi Andy,

I read this email, and modulo the changes in the web proposal, it sounds
fine to me. Some queries, of course...

On Thu, 2004-01-15 at 17:36, Andreas Rottmann wrote:
> In each category, I will setup a dev-0 branch, wich will carry current
> development version (similiar to CVS HEAD). I think it will be best to
> use taglines throughout the project. 

Why would it be best to use taglines? I'm not opposed or in favor, I've
just used explicit tagging until now. So why taglines?

> [ Wingo: It would be really nice to know about your state wrt. syncing
>   with my tree, since we need an agreed-upon source base to start
>   with. ]

I think we're up-to-date now, with the changeset I posted, no? We'll
only really be collaborating when we branch off of the same archive.

> glib--dev--0:       As above
> glib--main--0.6:    Branched from dev-0 when GLib 2.4 is released. 
> Development 
>                     for the GLib 2.4 series goes on here.
[...]

It seems you've changed your mind about the version numbers, in your web
proposal. That's probably a good thing. However, we can't promise that
the GTK 2.6 bindings will be backwards-compatible with the 2.4 bindings,
since things are still in flux on the gobject level (although they might
be settling down a bit).

> Tanks for reading all this,

Thanks for thinking about it ;) And I'll try to be more responsive in
the future. Cheers.

-- 
Andy Wingo <address@hidden>