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]

Reply via email to