Shouldnt we branch the changes after merging 1.0 bug fixes to master that
way we dont end up with a bottle neck of new features waiting to be merged
that would probably need to be rebased due to master diverging too much?
On Mon, May 19, 2014 at 6:09 PM, Vesa <dii....@nbl.fi> wrote:
> On 05/19/2014 06:09 PM, Tres Finocchiaro wrote:
> > I've observed quite a few changes to master for our 1.1 release.
> >
> > Should the project consider focusing stability on a few major
> > milestone features?
>
> We already have a sort of unofficial feature freeze. Large new features
> won't be merged anymore until we branch out 1.1 to its own branch.
> Smaller new features that aren't likely to cause instability - such as
> your vst/sf2 commit - can still get in...
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> "Accelerate Dev Cycles with Automated Cross-Browser Testing - For FREE
> Instantly run your Selenium tests across 300+ browser/OS combos.
> Get unparalleled scalability from the best Selenium testing platform
> available
> Simple to use. Nothing to install. Get started now for free."
> http://p.sf.net/sfu/SauceLabs
> _______________________________________________
> LMMS-devel mailing list
> LMMS-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/lmms-devel
>
--
Jonathan Aquilina
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Accelerate Dev Cycles with Automated Cross-Browser Testing - For FREE
Instantly run your Selenium tests across 300+ browser/OS combos.
Get unparalleled scalability from the best Selenium testing platform available
Simple to use. Nothing to install. Get started now for free."
http://p.sf.net/sfu/SauceLabs
_______________________________________________
LMMS-devel mailing list
LMMS-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/lmms-devel
