On Wednesday, 19 December 2012 at 20:51:57 UTC, deadalnix wrote:
On Wednesday, 19 December 2012 at 19:56:47 UTC, Rob T wrote:
Do we all agree that we need a "stable" branch?
No. Stable isn't a boolean criteria. You'll find different
degree of stability going from not so stable (dev version) to
very stable (dead project).
The wiki already mention a process with a branch per version of
the software.
Let's generalize this point for the sake of reaching consensus -
we need _at least one_ "stable" branch which is separate from
"staging". We are still conflicted as to what should be the
maximum amount. For the record, I'm with the camp advocating at
most a fixed amount countable on one hand. That's an O(1) with a
very small constant as opposed to the O(n) suggestion by Andrei.
I hope Andrei appreciates the order of efficiency here.
