At Tue, 24 Jun 2003 20:28:08 +0200 (CEST), Jaroslav wrote: > > > i believe, if we change the configuration syntax, it would be better > > to branch the development tree (or jump the version number). > > the current system works well already in many fields, so it's nice to > > keep the stable series. > > We can do it when we need to break the compatibility behaviour.
hmm, i think we need now some release engineering. ALSA 0.9.x series has been released as the STABLE line, and that means that the API should be kept as much as possible. i don't think it's good to include the experimental code for a fundamental change to such a tree (even in cvs). i know it's a bit annoying to keep both different cvs branches up-to-date. but now it's the time to separate clearly what we've done and what we'll do. this will make it easy to release the newer 0.9.x tarball, too. well, if we were to use bitkeeper, it would be easier to keep the different trees in sync... :) Takashi ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.Net email sponsored by: Free pre-built ASP.NET sites including Data Reports, E-commerce, Portals, and Forums are available now. Download today and enter to win an XBOX or Visual Studio .NET. http://aspnet.click-url.com/go/psa00100006ave/direct;at.asp_061203_01/01 _______________________________________________ Alsa-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/alsa-devel
