Steen / S�ren If you want a committer (which I am not) to explain the rational behind HEAD being v3 and 2.1_fcs being 2.2 you will probably need to post this as an explicit question. Meanwhile, here is my <personal> view on where we are regarding fetchmail.
http://nagoya.apache.org/wiki/apachewiki.cgi?James/Development very briefly describes the objectives for v2 and v3. Currently, the focus is on getting v2.2 out, and with only so many hours in a day, not all patches are simultaneously being committed to both HEAD and 2.1_fcs as perhaps they should be. That is why the fetchmail version in 2.1_fcs is more recent than the one in HEAD. Because the two versions are out of synch., my most recent patch is against the functionally superior 2.1_fcs version only. HEAD can be brought back into sync. by applying a cumlative patch for fetchmail once v2.2 is out the door. You could take a similar approach too and I would be happy to build the cumulative patch for HEAD when the time comes. Note that this is not the only way to do things and may not be the way favoured by Noel who has been doing the builds. -- Steve Steen Jansdal wrote: > > Soeren Hilmer wrote: > > I am looking at HEAD branch, FetchMail version 1.9. > > HEAD branch should be the newest right? But it seams to be > 4 months old, hmmm. > > > > I cannot select any v. 2.2 branch though? > > > > Please tell me what is going on here. The code you supply > can be found under > > 2.1_fcs. > > But according to contributions patches MUST be made against > HEAD branch and > > then backported. > > > > Does this mean that if I have a patch for this new > fetchmail 1.9.2.1, I should > > not make it against HEAD but against 2.1_fcs? > > > > I think it is a "little" confusing, I believe there are > good reasons to only > > implement functional (and I regard a robustness enhancement > as such) against > > the HEAD branch, It will IMO make life easier for you > comitters, when > > non-comitters like myself, submit patches against the > functionally superior > > branch. Am I totally wrong in this impression? Then please > enlighten me. > > > > regards > > S�ren > > > > I've downloaded 2.2.0a10 from > > http://cvs.apache.org/builds/james-server/test-build/src/ > > I too find it a little confusing (note: I'm not a comitter), > maybe some of the real committers can enlighten us. > > Steen > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
