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 would
preclude my cleanups for example.

> Do we make a new branch, which would be the current 2.3 base (and name
> it something like  branch/2.x, delete the current branch/2.3) and
> continue to work that way (with 2.4, 2.5 and so on), or do we just
> forget about it being feature locked, and start up with the beta
> cycles again (with 2.3.2 beta 1?) ?

At the moment I don't see any changes that would justify betas, though I want
to work on stuff that actually gets released, so I wouldn't want 2.3 to be
feature locked. Actually I'm considering to continue with 2.3 even when trunk
gets released in some form.

> Do we take codename (which was trunk, and pretty stable the last time
> I tried it) and use that as a new base for the next release (3.0 ?) ?
> Anyone see another way around having all these branches floating around ?

A. make a branch only when it's needed, B. finish and merge it back.

Warzone-dev mailing list

Reply via email to