On Mon, Sep 7, 2009 at 10:54 AM, Ville M. Vainio <[email protected]> wrote:
> > On Mon, Sep 7, 2009 at 5:51 PM, Edward K. Ream <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > But how am I to fix the cache bug in the clean-one-node branch? > > You don't necessarily need to fix it there, just fix it in 46-maint and > merge it to trunk. Huh? The bug had better have been fixed in the 46-maint branch. If not, it was released in Leo 4.6.3. Though, I assume trunk already has it - I guess > we just need to revert to old 46-maint (just before it got "polluted" > by merging trunk to it) and start cutting new releases from it. > > >> I think the best way forward would be to delete the 4.6.3 release and > >> release 4.6.4 with quick schedule, based on old 4.6.2. We can cherry > >> pick the necessary fixes (installer and cache bug). > > > > Why not base 4.6.4 on the trunk? Wouldn't that be safer than > cherry-picking > > bug fixes? > > No, because trunk has many changes that are not fixes for critical > bugs. It's more problematic from version control perspective, but > necessary to deliver "safe" code. We can't really rely on trunk before > it's had time to stabilize (I rely on it personally, but as we can see > others have different experiences). > I have a really bad feeling about this. I had no idea that merging the trunk into a branch could present such problems. I am thinking just now that the trunk is likely to be much more reliable than the 46-maint branch, either as the 46-maint branch exists now, or as it might become after reversions, cherry picking, etc. The great advantage of the present trunk is that a lot of people are using it. My assumption is that all unit tests are likely to pass whatever we do to the 46-maint branch. In other words, the unit tests won't catch any blunders. > > > Where did this come from? I don't recall anything related to leoID in > the > > 4.6.3 branch? > > No idea, probably accidental twitch somewhere. Perhaps sys.path cleanup? > I'll look at the relevant files asap. > > > Just to double check, is it alright with you to abandon the 46-maint > branch? > > I don't think it's a good idea. I believe we should keep releasing Leo > in 2 streams, one with stable bugfix-only stuff and one with new > features. > Ok. But because of my bzr blunders, I'm thinking that it would be best to base a new 463-maint branch on the present trunk. I can then institute the correct policy of fixing bugs in the branch and merging to the trunk. Presuming that I can find the "twitch" in the leoID code, I'd like to push the fix to the 463-maint branch later today, and release Leo 4.6.4 by Wednesday at the absolute latest. Edward --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "leo-editor" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/leo-editor?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
