|Main Archive Page > Month Archives > spamassassin-dev archives|
On 09/14, Kevin A. McGrail wrote:
> - Post-release, trunk and 3.4 branch will be kept in sync perfectly
> and all programmers will write code with zero bugs ;-)
So now, after 3.4 is branched from trunk in svn, you want *all* changes to
trunk backported to 3.4, with two other people reviewing each?
On 09/14, Quanah Gibson-Mount wrote:
> My summary would be that Darxus simply doesn't understand revision
> control systems or release engineering. Probably something he
> should spend some time researching before he provides any further
> commentary on this thread.
It could be. It would make more sense that the problem is my lack of
understanding of revision control systems, and not just an apparent need
to make everything as much work as possible. When the most unstable
code in this project, trunk, has been rock solid reliable since I started
running it in April.
I've used several revision control systems. I've never maintained one
myself, really. My previous related comment was just to allow, again, for
the possibility that I missed something (a technical reason a svn branch
couldn't be named "3.4.1" instead of "3.4"). Is there any particular
aspect of RCS or release engineering that you would like me to read up on?
-- "Government is not reason, it is not eloquence, it is force; like fire, a troublesome servant and a fearful master. Never for a moment should it be left to irresponsible action." - George Washington http://www.ChaosReigns.com