On Fri, Mar 15, 2002 at 03:32:00AM +0100, Dag-Erling Smorgrav wrote: > "Bruce A. Mah" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > Differences of opinion on naming aside...the branch isn't supposed to > > last long at all. The point is to provide a slightly polished snapshot > > to the wider developer community. We can't do the QA/releng work on > > HEAD without calling for a code freeze (which we early on decided that > > we would *not* do). > > Then you don't need a branch, you just need a simple tag, and you can > slide it forward if something needs fixing, and remove it after > rolling and shipping the snapshot.
Sliding tags around at the request of hundreds of different developers making thousands of changes to -CURRENT over that time period is not very appealing. However, all of our other options are rapidly being shot down as well. Peter raises some valid concerns about the pains that branching CVS will cause. They would have been much more helpful if voiced to re@ a week ago, but that's another issue. At the very least a tag is going down in approximately 24 hours. - Murray
Description: PGP signature