> 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. >
+1. Amos
