On Wed, Aug 30, 2000 at 04:34:25PM -0500, Cameron, Steve wrote:
> Noel Yap wrote:
> > It's interesting that none of "cvs edit -c", "cvs edit -f", and "cvs ci
> -c" made
> > it into this release even though the patches have been out there for quite
> some
> > time (at SourceForge under project RCVS) and many people are already using
> it.
> > IMO, these patches are extremely important in that they satisfy most users
> who
> > want reserved locks while not making irate those who prefer concurrent
> > development -- it's the best of both worlds.
>
> You aren't surprised, right? Of course this snapshot is just the
> current contents of the CVS repository, the same thing you'd get
> if you did an anonymous checkout.
>
> I too have a big patch that I'd like to get in there some time.
> (but I still have a little work I need to do on it, testing-wise,
> though there are no problems that I know of with the patch.)
>
> This talk of a "feature freeze" amuses me somewhat, as it seems
> to me that CVS has been under a "feature freeze" for quite some time
> already (witness that people are advised to upgrade to 1.10.8 from 1.10,
> since pretty much the only changes in that interval are bug-fixes.)
>
> The thing I've noticed about CVS development is this: patches like
> mine and Noel's aren't rejected so much as silently ignored.
The problem is probably, that there is no one out there feeling really
responsible for saying "Yes" or "No" or "Please adjust your contribution
in this manner ...". The guys of OpenAv seem to be reserved about
leading the development and who else do you think should accept or deny
the patches?
Regards,
Matthias
--
Matthias Kranz [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.belug.org/~kranz
"Ever tried. Ever failed. No matter. Try again.
Fail again. Fail better." (Samuel Beckett)
