Andrea Aime wrote: > Justin Deoliveira ha scritto: >> Hi Andrea, >> >> Sounds like a good idea, but I do have a couple of concerns. >> >> 1. It would be another branch to manage. Things to indeed get messed >> with all the branches we have to manage, this increases the risk of that. > > The fact that we accept only critical bug fixes in RC should > minimize this. Well its often the "little fixes" that get missed so i am not sure I agree. But... not much we can do about it. > >> 2. Unless we stay disciplined I think it promotes trunk like development >> on a stable branch. I think we already push the envelope on what could >> be considered stable development. I don't want people to start thinking >> that stable branches are a playground for experimentation. > > There is wild experimentation and there is stuff like my WFSV bug fixes > waiting for 1.7.x to be free, or David's KML improvements, or new > modules that do not touch the core or the main services. > We always allowed limited development on the stable branch, and moved > everything that's any heavier to trunk. As far as I'm concerned that > approach has served us well so far. Right, i am just trying to remind that this policy does not mean people can do whatever they want as long as its not on an RC branch. > >> 3. Coordination with gt2 releases. If we adopt the same scheme for >> geotools then i assume we create a "RC branch" for geotools the same >> time we create one for geoserver? This would be fine if we were the only >> project driving or using geotools. And how do we deal with people that >> want to get a fix into a geotools point release, but that fix does not >> directly fix a GeoServer bug? > > We can start creating GS only releases. Hmmm... not that I am against it but GS only released means we abondoned the geoserver major point release against a geotools major point release. If you think about it, 2.5.x > is atctually a GS only branch, as 2.4.x and 2.3.x have been as well, > so we're actually already doing that. Not sure I agree. When we released 2.5.0 there were people that wanted to see certain features that were not specific to GeoServer. Just going ahead with the release would have left them out in the cold. > Cheers > Andrea >
-- Justin Deoliveira OpenGeo - http://opengeo.org Enterprise support for open source geospatial. ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Moblin Your Move Developer's challenge Build the coolest Linux based applications with Moblin SDK & win great prizes Grand prize is a trip for two to an Open Source event anywhere in the world http://moblin-contest.org/redirect.php?banner_id=100&url=/ _______________________________________________ Geoserver-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/geoserver-devel
