On Wed, Dec 1, 2010 at 9:46 AM, Trevor Daniels <t.dani...@treda.co.uk> wrote: > > Graham Percival wrote Tuesday, November 30, 2010 8:04 AM > >> I'm willing to try it as an experiment, but I >> really doubt that having a separate branch would encourage more >> people to spend more time on critical issues. > > It wouldn't, but that wasn't the point of the > suggestion. There's a history of new code not > working quite right due to bugs, oversights, etc > that only come to light a few weeks later.
That's why the release plan calls for having a release candidate for two weeks, with no critical issues reported against it, before making a stable release. That release candidate would of course be made from a separate branch, with only translation patches being applied to that branch. I'll wait another day for comments in case anybody missed it due to the savannah list downtime, but I despite my objection, I'll branch stable/2.14 in the next few days unless anybody speaks heavily against it. Cheers, - Graham _______________________________________________ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
