On May 31, 2005, at 7:40 PM, David Blevins wrote:
On Tue, May 31, 2005 at 04:21:21PM -0700, David Blevins wrote:
On Tue, May 31, 2005 at 11:50:43AM -0400, Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
Can we agree that we need to somehow construct the stable, unstable
and sandbox codebases?
I don't think we have agreed on what is stable and what is
unstable. We were having a discussion on the fact that it is now
impossible to offer a stable upgrade/patch path for applications.
That thread was killed with "PLEASE CAN WE PUT IT ON HOLD UNTIL
AFTER CERTIFICATION."
Now Jeremy has proposed that we ignore that discussion and begin
cementing what we currently have as stable. How is that at all fair?
Just going to throw out that I think the only goal we can all agree
on is to not regress on certification once we achieve it.
I think that's a requirement, certainly in the "stable" tree :)
geir
-David
--
Geir Magnusson Jr +1-203-665-6437
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
