Jon Berndt said: > > Please don't misunderstand me: I don't request _anyone_ to make a > > compromise in order to deal with the way _I_ can afford giving spare > > time to the FlightGear project. I just ask you (or whom it may belong > > to) to acknowledge that such a tight release process makes it > > _extremely_ difficult for part-time contributors (like me) to follow > > the track, > > > > Martin. > > > That's just it. Why should there even be a pre-release? The guys doing
There were a couple bugs fixed this time. And the xcf files were removed from the final base package after they were found to be in the pre-release. > Now, this "observation" is not an invitation for some of you to bare your > teeth and throw yourselves out in front of an oncoming truck to "take one" > for Curt. It's thrown out for serious and constructive consideration in > resolving an obvious issue that has come up in our process. Obvious? > Does anyone have any suggestions? I noticed Norman's thought that branches > are one way to address this. I'm not comfortable with branches, really, but > I think that's because I have not used them a whole lot and perhaps we ought > to look into that, no? > > Is there any movement to suggest a minimum time span that a pre-release > would have life? Ok. 12 hours. Best, Jim _______________________________________________ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
