On Sat, 2002-11-02 at 21:31, Victor Mote wrote: > I agree that maintenance branches are not obliged to be merged eventually, > but you still have not shown any benefit to keeping them in the same tree if > they are not. > > Usual development pattern would also be that someone makes sure that new > functionality doesn't get added to the maintenance release. That is > apparently what Keiron is attempting to do now, and I have no problem with > that. However, our web site says this:
I'm not trying to make sure functionality doesn't get to the branch, I am trying to get a focus on something that I consider to be more efficient use of time. > "If you want to work with the latest and nicest code, you can use the cvs > version. See the section on AnonCVS in the xml.apache.org documentation for > details.... > > "Important: Currently, releases of FOP are coming out of the > "fop-0_20_2-maintain" branch. The "MAIN" branch is used for the redesign. > See NEW DESIGN for more information." > > I hope I will be forgiven for not correctly interpreting the multitude of > mixed signals. When someone starts quoting the website then it is time to update it :) --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
