Martin Landa wrote > 2014-04-06 15:16 GMT+02:00 Moritz Lennert > >> Hamish, maybe you could be the official grass6 maintainer, managing the >> whole grass6 development in the way you propose, i.e. any new development >> and bugfixes first go into grass6dev for a period of testing, before >> _you_ >> make the decision that something can be backported to grass6release. I do >> think however, that for this to work, we would need to regularly publish >> snapshots of grass6dev for easy testing. > > I think we should really stop thinking about GRASS 6 "development", > ideally we should fully focus our energy on GRASS 7. We do not have > enough man-power for keeping development in GRASS 6, simply saying. So > please bug fix only should go there (relbr64). No new functionality. > > Martin > -- > Martin Landa * http://geo.fsv.cvut.cz/gwiki/Landa
I encourage this. the intention/motivation, why I've written the mail (and mail subject) in that way I did, was/is to push forward GRASS 7 to a status ready for release _and not to forget_ GRASS 6 - just always keeping grass-dev man power in mind. IMHO sometimes it's time to do the next (maybe challenging) step to get GRASS 7 with all the fancy news out into the wild. regarding release stability, I think it's all about communication with the community. ----- best regards Helmut -- View this message in context: http://osgeo-org.1560.x6.nabble.com/too-many-branches-tp5131993p5133442.html Sent from the GRASS-PSC mailing list archive at Nabble.com. _______________________________________________ grass-psc mailing list grass-psc@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/grass-psc