Re: branch-2-0 vs CVS HEAD

[Albert Chin]

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)