On 9/3/13 11:47 , John Morris wrote: > On 09/03/2013 09:44 AM, Sebastian Kuzminsky wrote: >> * The 'master' branch on git.linuxcnc.org will become 2.6 in the future, >> after the fate of two outstanding feature branches is determined. >> >> * The first feature branch is joints_axes3. It's currently undergoing >> refinement for merging into master. >> >> * The other feature branch is unified-build-candidate-2. It's currently >> awaiting review from the wider development community. >> >> * Once those two merges happen, or we've decided to postpone them, we'll >> branch 2.6 off master. > > This is the second time I've read that you or Chris see UB/RTOS not > getting into the 2.6 release as a possibility. Can you clarify what > sort of scenario you envision where this could be a realistic outcome?
I am very hopeful that the new RTOS work will make it into master before we fork 2.6. My only trepidation comes from the massive infusion of change at the very end of the development cycle. The merge of ubc will push out the 2.6.0 release quite a bit, because I want lots of runtime on the branch before i call it "stable" and release it to users. The scenario i've been thinking of where ubc isn't part of 2.6 would have us fork 2.6 pretty much as master is now (possibly with ja3 merged since it's about 1/10 the size of ubc and contains only one logical change instead of the half-dozen or so changes in ubc). Then right after the 2.6 branch we'd merge ubc into master for 2.7. In this scenario I'd aim for a much shorter release cycle for 2.7, basically just enough to stabilize ubc. But I think the likelier scenario is that we merge ja3 and ubc in the next month or two, deal with the build infrastructure changes etc, and start making 2.6 pre-releases to encourage testing before the release. I know how hard you've worked on ubc and how valuable the features you've implemeted are, and i really want to get that value out to our current users and to all the new users that ubc enables. > I hope the community agrees the UB/RTOS work's feature of greatest > importance is the possibility of packaging an RT-enabled LinuxCNC for > the big distros for the first time. The 2.6 release is the first and > last chance in the foreseeable future to give UB/RTOS the official > status under the project required for submission to the distros. It > would be a tremendous setback to miss this opportunity. The greatest benefit i see in the UB branch is support for more RT kernels and the additional binary architectures that come with that. But i see that other people highly value the possibility of getting into popular distros like Debian and Red Hat, and understand the appeal of that too. -- Sebastian Kuzminsky ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Learn the latest--Visual Studio 2012, SharePoint 2013, SQL 2012, more! Discover the easy way to master current and previous Microsoft technologies and advance your career. Get an incredible 1,500+ hours of step-by-step tutorial videos with LearnDevNow. Subscribe today and save! http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=58040911&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk _______________________________________________ Emc-developers mailing list Emc-developers@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-developers
