Hi, > Yes because the rate of the development is very slow. > If the commits are more frequent, then the chances are > high to get a broken snapshot.
Yes, exactly, I never opened a development branch because the activity on the main branch was very slow and mostly bug fixing. I allowed some mild development but that's mostly new features that don't break code. Of course, the non-zero base changes affected a lot of code but those were no-ops in the case of a zero base. There was a small probability to get a broken snapshot (compilation errors) but they have been fixed quickly. In the old days before 1.0 yes it was different; there were a lot of things that broke during development, and the DOSEMU maintainers before me were annoyed because they were getting bug reports because distributors were shipping devel releases. There was of course, in retrospect a period of time where 1.1 was more stable than 1.0 and 1.3 more stable than 1.2 -- I should just have declared it stable earlier to avoid confusion. As for version numbers, avoid calling it 1.5 because that suggests a devel release. 1.6 would be ok, even if 1.5 is skipped. Calling it 2.0 would be for the same reason that Linus called 2.6.40 "3.0", just to get shorter version numbers and show that we no longer have the even/odd stable/devel releases. Thanks Stas for the SF patch cleanup, I'll have a look at the remaining ones this week and apply the easy ones. I can also do the little admin things (tagging, putting up a tar ball), the things you are doing already save me a lot of time. Bart ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Everyone hates slow websites. So do we. Make your web apps faster with AppDynamics Download AppDynamics Lite for free today: http://p.sf.net/sfu/appdyn_sfd2d_oct _______________________________________________ Dosemu-devel mailing list Dosemu-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/dosemu-devel
