[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: emacs 21.2

From: Eli Zaretskii
Subject: Re: emacs 21.2
Date: Sat, 23 Mar 2002 10:59:44 +0200

> From: Miles Bader <address@hidden>
> Date: 23 Mar 2002 08:54:25 +0900
> On the other hand, a traditional pretest is too late for many kinds of
> changes, so I wonder if it would be a good idea to officialy have two
> stages in the pretest:
>    (stage 1)  Did everything important get fixed?
>    (stage 2)  [a more normal `no big changes' pretest]

Alternatively, we could announce a planned beginning of a pretest
some time, like a month, in advance, and ask the pretesters to try
the CVS code.  (A snapshot of the CVS could be prepared at that time,
if accessing the CVS is not good enough.)

In general, development on both the trunk and branch is a pain, and
also prone to errors, so it should be avoided, I think.  It's better
to have a feature freeze when the branch is cut, I think.

reply via email to

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