Le 07/01/2013 15:09, Ted Gould a écrit :
On Mon, 2013-01-07 at 07:35 +0100, Didier Roche wrote:
Also, that we have to do that because there is a bad history of
committing to ABI and API stability, remember that normally, in every
normal upstream project, such a breakage ask to change the soname,
and in this case, we will know beforehand on which version of the
-dev package to build-dep. We are just workarounding here bad
upstream practice.
The problem is that we're not talking about released versions, which
certainly should manage their API/ABI with proper SO numbers etc,
we're talking about development trunk. We've removed the ability to
have a playground before committing to an API that developers are
committing to. We can't expect merging to trunk to be a long term
commitment to API or ABI stability. Doing a release is saying "this
is baked" and we'll commit to it, proposing a merge is not.
Indeed, we removed a playground, but that was 2 cycles beforehand
already. Starting the 11.10 release development cycle, we went to "trunk
is sacred" thanks to the acceptance criteria and that's how we start
raising the quality bar. This means that trunk is not a playfield
anymore, but rather when something hits trunk, the quality is high
enough to pass tests.
You can take whatever other branch you want, like calling it "next foo
feature", then, using that one and having other people and yourself
branching from it, merge into it, writing tests, experimenting with
other ppas containing it. Once it's baked and ready for more people to
use it, you then propose this feature branch for a full review against
trunk. After having it accepted and tests passing, the feature, merged
to trunk is then pushed to ubuntu.
--
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~unity-dev
Post to : [email protected]
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~unity-dev
More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
