On 11/7/06, Rob Hudson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I think this is a self-imposed limitation to allowing a branch that's > close to be merged to trunk to get more testers. For myself, I'd much > rather see some broken things on trunk on occasion if that means it is > easier to develop and move Django forward. > > I'm not involved in a lot of open source projects, but at least for > Mozilla, this seems how they operate. Things get broken on trunk as > they merge in new features. Eventually, bugs get worked out, and they > do a code freeze prior to a release to make the release as stable as > possible. > > Would Django consider adopting a model like that?
That's exactly what we're using the branches for: Things get broken on the branches as branch owner merge in new features. Eventually, bugs get worked out, and they do a code freeze prior to the merge to make the branch as stable as possible. :) The self-imposed limitation to making trunk usable at all times is one of the things I particularly like about our arrangement. It's mostly for developer convenience, so fans of the latest-and-greatest can simply "svn update" their Django codebase to get the latest, with minimal breakage. It's all the convenience of daily builds with none of the upgrade overhead. Adrian -- Adrian Holovaty holovaty.com | djangoproject.com --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Django developers" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/django-developers?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
