> I disagree. Merging branches after a year or so of development in these
> not-so-modular LyX sources is a major pain and I think it's a sure bet
> to assume that most of the work spent in these branches will be lost.
Oh, I disagree. It's very easy to keep a branch up-to-date.
It's only a matter of issuing the correct cvs command often
enough.
The reason the old new-kernel branch was dropped, was because we made
too many changes at the same time, and that caused the entire program
to become unstable.
We want to avoid this same situation, and for this purpose, branches
is IMO perfect. Then, we have the potential of three semi-stable branches,
rather than one unstable branch.
When the Hebrew or multi-byte encoding branch proves to be stable and
feature-complete, we merge it into the main branch. This way, we can
make sure that we always have a stable branch, which is ultra-important.
Greets,
Asger
