Alright guys, we're talking over each other again and are too far
down in the details.
This entire thing started as Geir wanted to do 1.0-M5.1, 1.0-M5.2,
1.0-M5.3, ... 1.0-M5.N while we all work on 1.0-M6 (or whatever).
That's not a bad goal, but we have to agree on what we are going for
before we can decide what to call it.
So...
Are we going to put a stake in the sand now and start doing minor
revisions (patch only, no new features) on this release... or are we
going to wait till some time in the future?
I am totally cool with whatever, but we have to get on the same page
first.
If we decide to put a stake in the sand now and branch off a
stabilization effort, we will need to define at least at a high level
what "stable" means to us in terms of the actual code, functionality,
and files that comprise our software. There must be some common
yardstick on which we measure stable/unstable.
-David
- Re: [discuss] branch and tag policy (and stable/unstabl... David Blevins
-
