Hello libtoolers,
1) Can we move to use git now?
2) Can we create a branch-2-2 and cherry-pick bugfixes from HEAD
into it, aiming for a soonish 2.2.2 (let's say, in a few weeks;
already a few important issues are known)?
3) If yes and yes, do you agree with the proposed git policy:
master
Hi Bob,
* Bob Friesenhahn wrote on Tue, Mar 04, 2008 at 10:23:57PM CET:
I think that this topic should be discussed on [EMAIL PROTECTED] before
the final decision because not only libtool maintainers retrieve sources
and submit patches based on the version control system.
Sure, why not.
On Tue, 4 Mar 2008, Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
As far as cramping Gary's style goes, Gary (only used as an example
here) is prone to making large changes, and these changes may soon
render 'master' useless as a good source of patches for stable branches.
Ah, no, this problem is easily avoided.
On Tue, 4 Mar 2008, Gary V. Vaughan wrote:
My point is that as the master version advances in time, the baseline for
submitted patches will become more and more different. Eventually a patch
from the master version can not reasonably be applied against a stable
branch.
That's no different to
Howdy Bob,
On 4 Mar 2008, at 17:29, Bob Friesenhahn wrote:
On Tue, 4 Mar 2008, Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
As far as cramping Gary's style goes, Gary (only used as an example
here) is prone to making large changes, and these changes may soon
render 'master' useless as a good source of patches for
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
According to Ralf Wildenhues on 3/4/2008 1:56 PM:
| Hello libtoolers,
|
| 1) Can we move to use git now?
I sure hope so! It appears to have worked out well for coreutils,
autoconf, automake, m4, and gnulib, which are all closely related projects.
Hi Gary,
* Gary V. Vaughan wrote on Wed, Mar 05, 2008 at 12:10:30AM CET:
On 4 Mar 2008, at 15:56, Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
2) Can we create a branch-2-2 and cherry-pick bugfixes from HEAD
into it, aiming for a soonish 2.2.2 (let's say, in a few weeks;
already a few important issues are known)?
Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
I think we should wait until we are reasonably sure that we won't need a
maintenance release for several weeks before cutting over to git. 2.2.2
in a few weeks is a worthy goal (2.1b and 2.2 were on the first of the
month, so April 1st seems like a good target), so
