On 24-Apr-2009, Jaroslav Hajek wrote:
| so, what now? For convenience, I'll summarize my proposal once more:
| We'll essentially have two main development repos of different speed
| that will occassionally be synchronized (by merging, though this can
| still be discussed).
|
| Bug-fixing will primarily occur in stable repo and releases will be
| forked from it. The stable repo will enter a "feature freeze" state
| when a release is due to happen,
| otherwise it will occassionally pull the new stuff from main.
| Development of new features, improvements etc. will happen in main
| repo, which will be unaffected by "feature freeze".
I'm still trying to figure out how this will work. The model used by
GCC makes more sense to me. Releases are made from the main
development version. When (or just before) a release, a branch is
created for the stable release (say 3.2.0). Eventually, at the end of
the lifetime for the 3.2.x release series, that branch becomes
inactive. Development looks like this:
http://gcc.gnu.org/develop.html#timeline