At 10:03 AM 4/25/02 +0200, Per Larsson wrote: >Too often it's been like this: >1. Release is tagged. >2. Potentially unstable changes that have been held back waiting for the > release are commited. >3. Someone discovers some bad bug in the release.
A modest proposal. Discovering bad bugs at step 3 is a clear indicator that the release was *not*, in fact, ready for prime time. Instead of coming up with branch/tag policies to work around this problem, why don't we just fix it directly? I know that it's not easy to come up with a release process that avoids this "tag, destabilize, test" sequence, but IMNSHO it's worth trying. Paul, heretic
