Guys, stop this endless and pointless thread. You're both right. You should not have unstable code in a stable branch, that should be on trunk. This said, you should not spring out RCs without warning. Some stuff may actually be in trunk ready to be merged if you give a heads up, or some stuff may have just been merged and have had a merging issue causing problems on the branch, so could be fixed or reverted with proper warning.
My 2 cents. :) Steve ________________________________________ From: Robert Muir [rcm...@gmail.com] Sent: September 12, 2013 2:57 PM To: dev@lucene.apache.org Subject: Re: Lucene/Solr 4.5 > I superficially agree that trunk is a better place to do larger and > potentially less stable changes, but I think the problem is that it seems > that trunk is too far away from the stable branch and it just seems more > productive to "iterate" on both in parallel rather than do a lot of > iterating on trunk and then have to recreate a long iteration sequence on > the stable branch. The faster code gets into the stable branch, the faster > and more thoroughly people will test it out. > This is what i cant stand: its not the purpose of a stable branch. One way i can stop people from committing half-baked shit to the stable branch is to make release candidates without warning. One way you can stop me from making release candidates without warning is to not commit half-baked shit to the stable branch. This is really simple, and I will make zero compromises here. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org
