> 4) darcs 2.1 should probably learn to ignore junk from future darcs; > this will > require a patch to the temporary release branch which will generate > a conflict > with the current (un)stable branch
Hi Eric, thanks for your response on that issue. I feel the pain you're running into above. It's hard to keep things simple. I don't understand it as you do, but I still wonder if maintaining a parallel release branch is bringing you any real benefit ? An alternative might be to treat the stable trunk as your release branch, with a code chill/freeze period right before release as some well-known projects do. I know this means more (temporary) divergence from unstable sometimes, but so be it - if they can't diverge they don't have much purpose. My 2c. _______________________________________________ darcs-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.osuosl.org/mailman/listinfo/darcs-users
