Erik, just to stress how stable the stable branch is intended to be: I'll only be considering fixes for serious bugs: security bugs, lockups, backwards compatibility failures, etc. on the stable branch.I would certainly be willing to work on maintaining the stable branch with respect to FreeBSD if it's a general "stable" branch, and make packages of it if I find the time to set up that build machine I've been wanting to make (first I have to wait for those replacement drives, ugh).I would prefer if releases (to X, binary packages on the website) were made from the stable branch, but it would require committers to commit twice, once to the current development branch and then to stable later after the patch has been shown to work well. That way most development, even mach64 and such, could occur on the current branch. I wish I could have been at the discussion, but the meeting time with or without daylight savings time conflicts with classes :(
The idea is to have a relatively frequent release cycle (quarterly?) and all new development gets released in the *next* stable drop.
Keith
-------------------------------------------------------
This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek
Welcome to geek heaven.
http://thinkgeek.com/sf
_______________________________________________
Dri-devel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/dri-devel
