On Thu, 23 Oct 2008, Glynn Clements wrote:
Paul Kelly wrote:
I'd be more concerned about 6.3.1, as there have been a fair number of
straightforward bug-fixes since 6.3.0.
Well, I know easily 50 fixes which I have NOT backported to 6.3.svn, knowing,
that 6.4.0.RCX is forthcoming soon. Many are related to portability, too.
So I do think that we need a 6.4.0 the next months (at least I won't go through
all those fixes to check if they are present in 6.3.svn - even the code layout
isn't reindented).
I'm not sure if this is what Glynn meant, but I ask - why does 6.3.1 have
to be released from the 6.3.0 release branch? Why not just release 6.3.1
straight from develbranch_6? I really don't see the need to always have a
release branch for releases. IMHO it slows things down and is a major
impediment to "release early, release often" working.
Any release from develbranch_6 will contain incompatible changes, so
it should be called 6.4.0, not 6.3.1.
Ah OK now I see. Also as Helena said in private mail now that 6.4 is "out
of the bag", so to speak, because 6.3.0 was released from its own branch
and develbranch_6 was renamed to 6.4-SVN, users would see any 6.3.x
versions released as being not up to date because they are aware that 6.4
is somehow available.
Not saying 6.3.1 from the 6.3 release branch is a bad idea, but I doubt
anyone will have the motivation to merge the bugfixes and prepare a
release. So I feel there is no real option but to go straight to 6.4.0.
I'm still not sure if we need a release branch though.
Paul
_______________________________________________
grass-dev mailing list
grass-dev@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/grass-dev
