Martin Landa wrote: > >> IMHO, it would make maintenance much easier if one of 6.4 and > >> 6.5 would go rather sooner than later. > > > > I absolutely and quite strongly disagree. It is invaluable to have > > a staging area to test backports before putting them into the > > stable branch, and trunk has diverged too far from 6.4 to allow > > that to take the role. > > well, the real point is that we should focus our energy on GRASS 7 > development, and not playing with GRASS 6 as we do now. Is there any > comparison of devbr6 a relbr64? I am pretty sure that many changes, > fixes which has been committed to devbr6 were not applied later in > relbr64. It's too time/energy consuming for so small dev team to > maintain so many branches. > > It's really time to focus on grass7 (if we really want to release this > version in reasonable time, less then one year or so). I fully agree > with MarkusM, it's time to kill devbr6.
+1. If a change is too invasive to go into the 6.4 branch, it belongs on the 7.0 trunk. -- Glynn Clements <[email protected]> _______________________________________________ grass-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/grass-dev
