Markus Metz-3 wrote > Since the code base of devbr6 and relbr6 is largely identical, > the same fix can be applied to both branches which is not a lot of > work. > _______________________________________________ > grass-psc mailing list
> grass-psc at .osgeo > http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/grass-psc are you sure devbr6 and relbr6 are largely identical? if yes what's the benefit (for users and devs) to have both, when the focus on grass7 development/improvement would be a desired target ? if no what should be ported (from users' and devs'-view) from devbr6 to relbr6, when the focus on grass7 development/improvement would be a desired target ? as Martin mentioned on the ML, there aren't anymore nightly devbr6-wingrass nightlies (osgeo4w/standalone). ----- best regards Helmut -- View this message in context: http://osgeo-org.1560.x6.nabble.com/Re-GRASS-PSC-too-many-branches-retirement-GRASS6-5-svn-develbranch6-tp5133400p5133712.html Sent from the Grass - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com. _______________________________________________ grass-dev mailing list grass-dev@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/grass-dev