[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: branch-2-0 vs CVS HEAD

From: Albert Chin
Subject: Re: branch-2-0 vs CVS HEAD
Date: Tue, 23 Aug 2005 09:41:20 -0500
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.6i

On Tue, Aug 23, 2005 at 03:03:20PM +0100, Gary V. Vaughan wrote:
> Albert Chin wrote:
> >On Tue, Aug 23, 2005 at 08:11:48AM +0200, Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
> >
> >>So my point is: get HEAD stable now, then branch off and make
> >>2.59/1.9.6 compatible there.  Then bootstrap the release with the
> >>couple of naughty system-dependent fixes we know of in those
> >>autotools versions.
> >
> >Seems fine to me.
> I'm still uncomfortable with this, because we have been commiting 
> patches to HEAD that were deemed too destabilizing for branch-2-0,
> and I (for one) don't remember what they were...
> We have things backwards right now.  We should be working on getting
> branch-2-0 stable right now, and forward porting any patches generated
> in so doing to HEAD.  The only reason things have tilted the other
> way recently is that we have both been working on big patches that
> were easier to verify by adding tests to the new testsuite. 
> *Conceptually*, even these big patches are for branch-2-0, we just
> happened to develop them in the nicer non-frozen HEAD environment.

If the test suite is good enough, why should't HEAD be sufficient to
merge into branch-2-0?

I think some of us don't care as long as 2.0 is released somehow.
Though, I haven't tested 2.0 or HEAD :)

albert chin (address@hidden)

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]