On Tue, Sep 14, 2010 at 12:43 PM, Troy A. Griffitts <scr...@crosswire.org> wrote: > Understood going forward. > > There were a few factors which made this a slightly non-standard situation. > First, this wasn't exactly a bug fix. It was a workaround for a bug in a > version of libcurl. I was hoping libcurl would be patched. And no, I > personally didn't report the issue to the curl team, which I should have. > Secondly, one of our frontend projects submitted a small update which > changed something another of our frontends depended on. The second project > had updated their code to still work with the new change, but they hadn't > released yet. If they had released then everyone would be happy with us > releasing SVN as is. As it stands right now 1 of the 2 projects will need > to patch SVN for their frontend to work. So delaying was a hopeful but > unfruitful exercise. It was a choice we made to with the best information > we had at the time.
Not knowing the nature of the changes, etc, I don't mean to provide this as a comment on that, but I'd just like to bring back up this email: http://www.crosswire.org/pipermail/sword-devel/2009-June/032108.html and see if that's still the plan? If you're actually changing how things are working inside (in the sense of enhancing for new modules and content like the NASB and not just for fixing bugs), then maybe it is time to branch and allow for bug fixing/feature branches to develop separately until 1.7 is made? --Greg _______________________________________________ sword-devel mailing list: sword-devel@crosswire.org http://www.crosswire.org/mailman/listinfo/sword-devel Instructions to unsubscribe/change your settings at above page
