On Fri, 2011-04-01 at 20:07 +0100, David Woodhouse wrote:
> That's great; thanks. I'll do a little more testing on the patches
> I've cherry-picked into my trees, and then unless someone else has
> objected in the meantime I'll push them. 

I objected against this many times, directly to you, on IRC, with no
effect, obviously. If I recall correctly, the reason why release-team
decreased releases is that distributions were *not* using .2 release.
Which is just the opposite you are trying to convince us. If they are
not using official releases, why should they use unofficial branch?

By the way, how would you look for a fix user reported to your
distribution, as a distribution maintainer? The work-flow, as I
understand it, is like this:
a) user enters a bug report in your distro bugzilla
b) maintainer gathers enough information to identify the issue
c) check upstream bugzilla for a "duplicate" or possible fix
d) decide on the change whether backport or indicate "will be fixed
   in the next stable/unstable release"

Note that I do not expect anyone looking into git branch for a
particular fix, with a very good reason, they would rather check in
bugzilla, which offers much better searching ability and contains enough
information for possible bug matching, with compare of git commit. And
the bugzilla should have enough information about the fix, like either a
patch or a link to particular commit. The evolution-related products use
to it that way.

That's my opinion.

P.S.: as of today (or tomorrow, if you wish), the official stable
release is 3.0.0.

evolution-hackers mailing list
To change your list options or unsubscribe, visit ...

Reply via email to