On Thu, Jan 9, 2014 at 6:14 AM, Richard Hipp <[email protected]> wrote:
> > On Thu, Jan 9, 2014 at 10:12 AM, Remigiusz Modrzejewski < > [email protected]> wrote: > >> >> On Jan 9, 2014, at 16:00 , Martin S. Weber wrote: >> >> >> But I want Fossil to follow the latest SQLite alphas, not the latest >> SQLite >> >> stables. That's the whole point: Fossil supports SQLite as a test >> >> platform. SQLite stable has already been thoroughly vetted and tested >> and >> >> there is little point in testing it further. I want Fossil to run >> with the >> >> latest SQLite on trunk to smoke out bugs early. >> > >> > ...but fossil in itself is a pretty awesome piece of software, that's >> expected >> > by its users to be stable -- at least for releases. >> >> I second this view, Fossil is definitely valuable on its own merit. >> As such, its stable versions should not contain alpha-quality code from >> other projects. >> > > SQLite alphas are more robust that "stables" of most other software > projects. > I'd be more concerned about the appearance of using a SQLite alpha in Fossil. People have to have a great deal of faith in the quality and stability of their VCS - using anything branded "alpha" even on the insistence that it's better than most other stables could have a damaging effect on Fossil's reputation.
_______________________________________________ fossil-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users
