Re: [warzone2100-dev] svn/2.3 feature locked status, and what should happen with it

2010-06-24 Thread buginator
On 6/24/10, Per Inge Mathisen wrote: > On Thu, Jun 24, 2010 at 5:40 AM, buginator wrote: > > If we start to add features that do require beta testing, what are we > > going to do ? > > We could do beta testing... I was hoping for less work, not more, with the upcoming release of the 3.0 beta,

Re: [warzone2100-dev] svn/2.3 feature locked status, and what should happen with it

2010-06-23 Thread Per Inge Mathisen
On Thu, Jun 24, 2010 at 5:40 AM, buginator wrote: > If we start to add features that do require beta testing, what are we > going to do ? We could do beta testing... - Per ___ Warzone-dev mailing list Warzone-dev@gna.org https://mail.gna.org/listinf

Re: [warzone2100-dev] svn/2.3 feature locked status, and what should happen with it

2010-06-23 Thread buginator
On 6/23/10, Per Inge Mathisen wrote: > One thing we should consider backporting to 2.3 is the wavecast code, > which makes visibility a ton faster in trunk than in 2.3. > Though, that doesn't answer the question on what we should do with the 2.3 branch. If we start to add features that do requir

Re: [warzone2100-dev] svn/2.3 feature locked status, and what should happen with it

2010-06-23 Thread Per Inge Mathisen
One thing we should consider backporting to 2.3 is the wavecast code, which makes visibility a ton faster in trunk than in 2.3. - Per ___ Warzone-dev mailing list Warzone-dev@gna.org https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/warzone-dev

Re: [warzone2100-dev] svn/2.3 feature locked status, and what should happen with it

2010-06-22 Thread Christian Ohm
On Tuesday, 22 June 2010 at 19:57, buginator wrote: > Currently, I was assuming that 2.3 was feature locked, and we would > only be doing bug fixes. > > However, it has been expressed that the branch shouldn't be feature locked. I especially expressed that it shouldn't be bug fix only, since that