On Wed, Aug 05, 2009 at 01:40:34PM +0200, Danilo Šegan wrote: > > I want us to stick with Storm trunk, or else when we need to extend it > > or provide bug fixes we will be forking. We should be doing Storm work > > upstream rather than locally and backporting later (which is unlikely > > to ever happen). Storm isn't a big enough project to support multiple > > lines of development. > > I'd like that too. But first of all, before we are using Storm trunk, > I'd like us to have some time to stabilize on what we have in 2.2.7, and > then after 3.0 is out, move to Storm trunk, and keep working with that > (i.e. upgrade to the latest trunk whenever we start a new milestone, > thus giving us a month to test changes out). > > 0.14 upgrade was just too close for me to want another 40 revisions of > possible breakages.
If there are indeed 40 other revisions of unrelated changes, then the only sane choice for 3.0 is what we have right now or 0.14.1 (if that will be basically what we have right now). I realize there are other fixes in there, but if they aren't affecting us in production, we can worry about them in september. What we should be discussing as well is how to avoid having a release of Storm break so spectacularly on us; should we have a more active upgrade policy like we do for bzr, maybe rolling it out on one or two appservers at a time to see what the effect is? -- Christian Robottom Reis | [+55 16] 3376 0125 | http://launchpad.net/~kiko | [+55 16] 9112 6430 | http://async.com.br/~kiko _______________________________________________ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~launchpad-dev Post to : [email protected] Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~launchpad-dev More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
