On Fri, 14 Dec 2001, Vadim Gritsenko wrote: > > -----Original Message----- > > From: giacomo [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > Sent: Friday, December 14, 2001 11:17 AM > > To: cocoon-Dev > > Subject: Re: FW: patch politics > > > > On Fri, 14 Dec 2001, Gerhard Froehlich wrote: > > > > > Hi, > > > I think that issue is interesting for all of > > > us. Maybe some of you have additional > > > comments. > > > > > > Gerhard > > > > > > >-----Original Message----- > > > >From: Vadim Gritsenko [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > > >Sent: Friday, December 14, 2001 3:06 AM > > > >To: 'Gerhard Froehlich' > > > >Subject: RE: patch politics > > > > > > > > > > > >Hi, > > > > > > > >Good question. Sometimes I also think why people submitting things > only > > > >into HEAD, and not into branch. I think that: > > > > > > > >1. If this is a bug fix - _definitely_ should go to both branches, > > > >2. If something is totally new (like DBXML: protocol or Lucene > search) - > > > >it for sure goes into HEAD, > > > >3. Something in between, but does not breaks backward compatibility > - > > > >_may_ go into both (and may not), > > > >4. Everything else - I guess vote might be required here, so first > it > > > >may go into HEAD, and then be VOTEd in order to sync this into > branch. > > > >Another way is to commit changes and wait for reaction ;) > > > > > > > >Also, things like code cleanup or performance improvements should > go to > > > >both branches. > > > > Well, I'll clean up the HEAD branch slowly but I don't have the time > to > > do it in the 2.0 branch as well. I'd suggest to move the head to > > release quality and only patch the 2.0 branch for bugs. This way we > can > > get rid of the 2.0 branch sooner than later (which was always the > > proposed way to go IIRC). > > There is one problem with going with HEAD only: HEAD contains some > experimental/unverified/new code, and people always will come with > something new (so this situation won't change with time), and in > contrast with that, branch gets only stable/voted code.
Sorry, but there is a scratchpad area where such code can live. It has to be moved there if that code is not stable enough. Giacomo > > Vadim > > > > > Giacomo > > > > > > > > > >This is my suggestions - others could have other opinions. > > > > > > > >> -----Original Message----- > > > >> From: Gerhard Froehlich [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > > >> Sent: Thursday, December 13, 2001 8:36 PM > > > >> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > >> Subject: patch politics > > > >> > > > >> Hi Vadim, > > > >> how do you decide if a patch belong in the HEAD branch > > > >> or in both?? > > > >> > > > >> TIA > > > >> Gerhard > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> -------------------------- > > > >> Hey! It compiles! Ship it! > > > >> -------------------------- > > > > > > > >:))) > > > > > > > > > > > >Vadim > > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
