On Thu, 2008-09-25 at 22:40 +0200, Henrik Nordstrom wrote: > My vote: > > 1. Finish any pending major restucturing/reorganisations/reformmatting > first. For example if the code is to be restyled before 3.1 is "old and > mature" then it must be done before 3.1 is branched. Such changes is a > major blocker for branching. > > 2. Branch so 3.1 can start it's road to stabilization in a sensible > manner. It does not really matter if it's 100% feature complete, or if > there is some already committed features which isn't quite finished. > Small features is no different from bugfixes in terms of maintenance, > and if it's found there is committed unfinished stuff already in the > tree then it can quite easily be bounced to the next release after > branching (but not before). Also if now missing features gets further > delayed they simply won't make it in time for the release and will get a > new chance in the next release (3.2). > > 3. flame anyone who commits bugfixes embedded within feature commits. > Bugfixes need to be separate for the maintenance process to work. Any > bugfixes committed as part of feature commits gets hidden and lost from > the maintenane process.
I am OK with the above, especially if Amos prefers this path. Thank you, Alex.
