> >> There are a few usefull additions/fixes in 3.4 trunk which won't ever > >> get backported and it would be a pity to have to wait > > Why not back port the few features/fixes?
diff -U2 sa-3.3 sa-3.4 | (cd sa-3.3; patch) :) Seems to me the 3.4 (trunk) is being much better tested by active developers than a backport-patched 3.3.x would ever be. The only need for 3.3.3 would arise if some important security fix or large breakage like the Y2010 bug would pop up. > If there are no (or few) major changes, why not do the backports. They > should be trivial. Has the branch really drifted that far out of sync > with trunk? There are lots of small changes all over the place. We probably already lost track of all that has changed. > > Alex, what are your thoughts on NOT creating a 3.4 branch and continuing > > with trunk for development? You seem to be pro the concept above and it > > makes sense that if we switch to rtc on trunk say 1 week or so before a > > release date as defined in the ReleaseGoals, everyone is happy. Daryl writes: > I'm quite uncomfortable with that myself, however I haven't written a > lot of code for SA in the past couple of years myself. I do think > efforts should be placed on regular review of patches against stable > branches instead. To me it makes most sense to create a 3.4 branch at the time of a release or shortly before it. So I'm closer to Kevin on this than with Daryl. Mark
