I'm not sure there's really enough development going on that would
warrant doing it that way. I can't think of anything that's under
development in a dev branch that we'd want in trunk and not 2.4..
However I can think of lots of stuff (e.g. stabilization bug fixes)
that we'll definitely want to put have in 2.3/2.4 and trunk, so
delaying the branch until as late as possible is always the right
answer.
I admire you being proactive, and I appreciate you taking the lead
on the 2.4 release engineer! Thank you.
-derek
Quoting Phil Longstaff <[email protected]>:
I was using the development model that anything could go into trunk
but not necessarily into 2.3.x, so I created the branch to separate
the targeted 2.3.x development from the more general trunk
development.
Phil
________________________________
From: Derek Atkins <[email protected]>
To: Christian Stimming <[email protected]>
Cc: [email protected]
Sent: Sunday, April 5, 2009 4:27:59 PM
Subject: Re: r18015 - gnucash/branches - Create 2.4 branch
Hi,
Quoting Christian Stimming <[email protected]>:
Am Sonntag, 5. April 2009 01:45 schrieb Phil Longstaff:
Author: plongstaff
Date: 2009-04-04 19:45:29 -0400 (Sat, 04 Apr 2009)
New Revision: 18015
Trac: http://svn.gnucash.org/trac/changeset/18015
Added:
gnucash/branches/2.4/
Log:
Create 2.4 branch
Err... this 2.4 branch is copied from trunk r18014, but you've already done
further work on trunk which most probably should also be applied to any 2.4
branch there will be. Does this mean the 2.4 creation was prematurely? This
is fine and it's okay to delete it for now and re-create (copy)
later. Or did
I miss some specific planning which was the reason to decide that trunk
r18014 was a particularly good code state to start a 2.4 branch?
IMHO if we indeed plan for a 2.4 release cycle in the near future, the
branching from trunk to 2.4-branch will occur very shortly before the first
release candidate (maybe numbered 2.3.x) will be released, but not earlier
than that. To my knowledge, there isn't such an experimental 2.3.0 release
planned in the near future, or is there?
I'm asking because once there is indeed a 2.4 branch, I will have to
take care
to copy over all 2.2 (stable branch) translations on the new 2.4 stable
branch. The trunk translations are (intentionally) much much older than the
2.2 translations, so starting a new stable branch will trigger some
noticable
overhead work on the translation side which needs to be done. It's fine with
me to do this, but I need some clear communication about what is going to
happen with the 2.4 branch.
Yes, this branch is WAY premature.. WAY WAY WAAAAYYY premature.
We need to have a series of 2.3.x releases off of trunk first and
then only cut 2.4 AFTER 2.4.0 (or maybe even after 2.4.1 or 2.4.2) once
we think there's enough "to be committed" work that would require
branching off.
Regards,
Christian
-derek
-- Derek Atkins, SB '93 MIT EE, SM '95 MIT Media Laboratory
Member, MIT Student Information Processing Board (SIPB)
URL: http://web.mit.edu/warlord/ PP-ASEL-IA N1NWH
[email protected] PGP key available
_______________________________________________
gnucash-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-devel
_______________________________________________
gnucash-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-devel
--
Derek Atkins, SB '93 MIT EE, SM '95 MIT Media Laboratory
Member, MIT Student Information Processing Board (SIPB)
URL: http://web.mit.edu/warlord/ PP-ASEL-IA N1NWH
[email protected] PGP key available
_______________________________________________
gnucash-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-devel
