On Fri, 3 Jan 2014 15:37:26 +0200 "Ylinen, Mikko" <[email protected]> said:
> On Fri, Jan 3, 2014 at 3:06 PM, Carsten Haitzler > <[email protected]>wrote: > > > yes - why thus we need to track BOTH master AND stable. there is a need > > for both. in fact mobile likely needs to track both indefinitely too as per > > above explanation. due to the way developers work they MUSt have their > > lates features NOW and can't/won't wait for a version upgrade. in the past > > this has led to development being done *IN* tizen git repositories with no > > upstream reviews or approval and thus api's being baked into tizen releases > > that have since been rejected by upstream. that has caused a fork. so no > > matter what, tizen git repositories have acted as "master git development" > > repos just as a distant fork of upstream and then the big merge pain as we > > have now. it'll > > > > Do you think the problem is developers have no time to wait for a version > upgrade or whether EFL upstream acceptance criteria are higher? primarily #1, but also #2. so both. > 6 weeks release cycle sounds perfect for new feature and API additions. It > easily takes few weeks to iterate changes to make them upstream acceptable. far too long for the developers here who expect days not weeks. and sorry it's 12 weeks, not 6. same as kernel give or take -- Carsten Haitzler (The Rasterman) <[email protected]> _______________________________________________ Dev mailing list [email protected] https://lists.tizen.org/listinfo/dev
