|Main Archive Page > Month Archives > spamassassin-dev archives|
On 9/13/2011 4:29 PM, Axb wrote:
> On 2011-09-13 22:23, email@example.com wrote:
>> We waste so much time backporting to the last branch. And trunk has
>> incredibly stable. I hate to see releases that aren't taken from trunk,
>> seems like a waste of time and effort.
> for once I agree with Darxus :)
> There are a few usefull additions/fixes in 3.4 trunk which won't ever
> get backported and it would be a pity to have to wait
+1. You two have convinced me that 3.3 can be abandoned and we release
3.4.0 out of trunk but I would want to see something that makes this
major. That might be the ipv6 support for sa-update natively or
something else completely. And it could delay it but these release date
will hopefully get a fire under people.
>> What that actually *says* is entirely compatible with not branching.
>> It says trunk is *usually* commit-then-review, but temporarily switches
>> to review-then-commit shortly before release.
>> It looks like the method doesn't come down as a rule from Apache, so we
>> could just say, since we're so damn good at keeping trunk stable,
>> we'll do
>> all our releases from trunk, and keep it commit-then-review.
> I'd +1 to cut a "beta1" out of trunk.
My opinion is to wait on beta and go through bugzilla to make a list of
bugs to get finalized so we have a list of "goals" for the 3.4.X
release. Then people can start the commit frenzy.
Alex, what are your thoughts on NOT creating a 3.4 branch and continuing
with trunk for development? You seem to be pro the concept above and it
makes sense that if we switch to rtc on trunk say 1 week or so before a
release date as defined in the ReleaseGoals, everyone is happy.