Re: survey on multiple development versions

[David Kastrup]

"Phil Holmes" <address@hidden> writes:

> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "David Kastrup" <address@hidden>
>>
>> If we have branches with personal interests, it must become more
>> feasible for the respective authors with personal interests to provide
>> binaries if they consider that a good idea.  Any solution that will only
>> work via the "Phil, do more" route is not going to scale.
>>
>> -- 
>> David Kastrup
>
>
> I think it would potentially be feasible to have a page with a variety
> of builds of single binary types.  This could potentially be managed a
> la patchy, but the question is: if we had a set of, say Linux x86
> builds to try out, would people bother?
>
> It might make more sense to think about improved ways of creating
> stable releases during a continuing development cycle.

Well, that was supposed to be related to that.  Now Mike has chosen to
blast ahead with a solution of his before I or someone else made a
formal exposition of the basic problem.  We will need to come to turns
with how we will be trying to maintain a reasonable rate of stable
releases without stifling forward-looking development more than is
needed to not let the development diverge from the goal of stability
terminally.

This will certainly be a topic early in the 2.19 cycle which strictly
speaking is already on.

-- 
David Kastrup