On Tue, 14 Oct 2008, Matthias Julius wrote:
Knut Arne Bjørndal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Just a little note, I see you committed directly to stable, and not to
unstable. First of all it's nice to put new stuff into unstable,
second nobody has yet done a proper merge when creating new stable
versions, it's just been copied over from unstable so if somebody now
did a new stable they would probably unintentionally revert your
changes.
I have done proper merges for my little bug fixes I committed
recently. And if stable deviates too much from the common base it
makes merging a lot more painful.
That's why, each time unstable is changed in larger degree, the changes
from stable tree should be merged into it before.
I merged my lastest changes into unstable as well now :-)
Besides that _unstable was created to test changes before the code is
distributed widely and the stable client has become a lot more
reliable since spaetz has created the _unstable branch.
Which is correct. I also considered checkin into unstable, but after lots
of testing I was pretty sure, that the changes do not affect the normal
behaviour, so bugs should only be in the new additional code --> thus
checkin into stable.
Ciao
--
http://www.dstoecker.eu/ (PGP key available)
_______________________________________________
Tilesathome mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tilesathome
