On Tue, 2014-01-07 at 23:55 -0500, Adam Jensen wrote: > On Wed, 8 Jan 2014 03:41:37 +0100 (CET) > [email protected] wrote: > > > On Tue, 07 Jan 2014 23:33:52 +0000 > > > Brian Drummond <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > > There are now two branches; ghdl-0.31 and default. > > > > > > > > > > I'm not sure whether or not it might seem excessively pedantic for a > > > small project, but some [explicit] conventions within the > > > development, > > > documentation, and release engineering processes could make it > > > easier to maintain a consistent/coherent system. > > > > I agree. There were some doc in diet.sh, but it's somewhat outdated. I agree too : I'll look at the docs in dist.sh (soon!) and intend to add information to the Wiki. As for documenting the release process, it may be too early just now! Maybe when the dust settles around 0.31... > how about this scenario: > > * -current is where active development work is done. > * -release is a frozen point in the history of the source tree. > * -maintenance is where critical bug fixes to a -release are made. The first two are essentially what we have now; I don't know that we need a maintenance branch yet (though when 0.32 is released, that is essentially what 0.31 becomes) > * -RC : when -stable is internally consistent, rigorous testing and > polishing can begin on a Release Candidate snapshot. Clearly that would be an improvement over the last day or two :-) Sorry about that, folks... probably RC1 -> release will suffice for ghdl. - Brian _______________________________________________ Ghdl-discuss mailing list [email protected] https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/ghdl-discuss
