>>>> "mb" == Martin Buchholz
<martin(a)xemacs.org> writes:
mb> To keep things sane, it makes sense to have an unstable branch
mb> of the packages. Developers could check out the unstable
mb> branch using
I think this would make things _in_sane. Individual packages can have
their own unstable branches, but this should be under control of the
package maintainer.
Furthermore, in Ovidiu's case, he would have to _depend_ on the
_unstable_ branch of JDE. Yuck! How the hell do we sort _that_ out
in the SUMOs?
mb> This could also allow changes of questionable stability into
mb> the packages without breaking users of stable xemacs. And
mb> commits would not have to be delayed because of code freeze.
mb> When commits to unstable have been deemed stable, they can be
mb> merged onto the trunk, one package at a time.
Again, this is all upstream policy in principle. Not all maintainers
do development on the
cvs.xemacs.org sources; some simply check that
in as a vendor branch from a primary located elsewhere.
I agree that committer education will be hard, because we're going to
have to teach them to Do The Right Thing without knowing what it is
ourselves. Let's not go there.
--
University of Tsukuba Tennodai 1-1-1 Tsukuba 305-8573 JAPAN
Institute of Policy and Planning Sciences Tel/fax: +81 (298) 53-5091
_________________ _________________ _________________ _________________
What are those straight lines for? "XEmacs rules."