[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Potential flaw in patch-log pruning in proposal
From: |
Matthew Dempsky |
Subject: |
Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Potential flaw in patch-log pruning in proposal |
Date: |
Thu, 11 Nov 2004 20:09:53 -0600 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.1006 (Gnus v5.10.6) Emacs/21.3 (gnu/linux) |
Yann Droneaud <address@hidden> writes:
>> > We switch from bazaar to cathedral model
>>
>> I'm not sure that that's even a meaningful statement.
>
> I tried to mean that James was merging patches as they come, without
> following a development schedule of what features to add, merge,
> improve: it's bazaar style.
>
> As i read the rel-src-mgt.txt, we need some sort of roadmap for the new
> features (bug fix are generally not candidate for that ;) :
> this is catheadraal style.
I have to agree with Tom -- arguing whether this is bazaar or
cathedral's not meaningful. The new process still involves third
parties being able to participate in development, a central authority
over the mainline tree, and a mechanism for having patches
incorporated.
Feel free to call that process whatever you will. A rose by any other
name...
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Potential flaw in patch-log pruning in proposal, (continued)
Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Potential flaw in patch-log pruning in proposal, Thomas Lord, 2004/11/01
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Potential flaw in patch-log pruning in proposal, Matthew Dempsky, 2004/11/01
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Potential flaw in patch-log pruning in proposal, Thomas Lord, 2004/11/01
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Potential flaw in patch-log pruning in proposal, Yann Droneaud, 2004/11/01
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Potential flaw in patch-log pruning in proposal, Thomas Lord, 2004/11/02
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Potential flaw in patch-log pruning in proposal, Yann Droneaud, 2004/11/08
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Potential flaw in patch-log pruning in proposal,
Matthew Dempsky <=
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Potential flaw in patch-log pruning in proposal, Stephen J. Turnbull, 2004/11/12