On Fri, Jul 10, 2020 at 03:33:19AM -0400, Kevin A. McGrail wrote: > > But I'll +1 a vote to move active development to a 4.0 > branch and changing only rules on trunk so trunk stays as stable as it can > while 4.0 branch can be able to be more of a normal development branch with > the > risk inherent therein. I think that will risk trunk getting out of sync and > stale but that might be a benefit if stability is a desire.
Will comment since subject changed.. I would +1 for a 4.0 branch too, since it's mandatory anyway. Hopefully 3.4.5 is the last release and we are actually getting to 4.0. I believe a desired scenario would be just like it is now, 4.0 would be similar to 3.4 branch, and actual development would be in trunk. So not the way Kevin describes, why would development happen in 4.0 branch, it goes against normal development standards? Though I don't know what the masscheck branch should be then. Preferably the stable release that people actually use in production. This needs some consideration.
