I disagree. if you only have a single branch you can easily introduce new regressions and bugs on something that is already quite usable. the 1.0 branch is now used for bug fixing until we release 1.1. as well any bug fixes in 1.0 also get applied and or backported to the master branch, or the 1.0 branch can be merged back with the master branch. It is really up to tony to decide on this but, having multiple branches is a good thing though.
On Sat, Mar 29, 2014 at 8:48 AM, Tobiasz Karoń <[email protected]> wrote: > > On 23 Mar 2014 17:58, "Vesa" <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > On 03/23/2014 05:57 PM, Tobias Doerffel wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > > > as announced for weeks, we want to release 1.0.0 - if possible, today. > > > Is there any critical issue that I'm not aware of which should be > > > fixed before 1.0.0? As for the 1.0.0 milestone on Github, I'll ignore > > > the rather minor VST issue as the solution won't be a small fix only > > > but a rework of how the VST GUI/editor is instantiated and displayed. > > > > > > > IMO we should just release it. Doesn't matter if there are issues, it's > > already miles better than 0.4.15, and if something comes up, we can > > always release bugfix releases later. Doesn't matter if some small > > issues are unsolved now - it's better to just get the product out before > > people lose interest... > > > > Speaking of bugfixes, I wonder if we could discuss again about maybe > > dividing the development into two branches - stable and development? If > > I remember correctly, you said before that you prefer having just one > > master branch and each "subproject" in its own branch... but if we're > > going to release more often, I think we could benefit from a model of > > two separate branches - one that stays relatively stable and only gets > > bugfixes merged, and another where we'd be free to merge things more > > liberally, without worrying about whether they can be stabilized in > time... > > Isn't this going to lead us to the same place where we've been before? > When the dev branch is super cool yet unusable and the stable branch isn't > moving at all? > > I think that keeping only one branch makes people more motivated to keep > things usable, not experimental. Anybody can have their experiments in > their own branches anyway. > > Am I correct? > > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > Learn Graph Databases - Download FREE O'Reilly Book > > "Graph Databases" is the definitive new guide to graph databases and > their > > applications. Written by three acclaimed leaders in the field, > > this first edition is now available. Download your free book today! > > http://p.sf.net/sfu/13534_NeoTech > > _______________________________________________ > > LMMS-devel mailing list > > [email protected] > > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/lmms-devel > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > _______________________________________________ > LMMS-devel mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/lmms-devel > > -- Jonathan Aquilina
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________ LMMS-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/lmms-devel
