On Wednesday 25 July 2001 10:57 am, Lauri Watts wrote:
> I do understand this would be a radical change, and it might take a while
> to work in practise.  Given the userbase of people who already run CVS HEAD
> code, it might even be more practical to reverse the branching, so that
> HEAD is the stable branch, and new development is done in a new -UNSTABLE
> branch.

HEAD is already the stable branch. For large changes we tend to make seperate 
branches already. See e.g. the KSIRC_TEXT branch in kdenetwork/ksirc which 
contains unstable new ksirc code. (That's why I'm cursing on ksirc so often 
:-)

The big disadvantage of branches is that you have to merge changes between 
branches so we rather not use branches when it isn't absolutely necassery.

Compiling KDE is already bad enough, having to keep two branches up to date 
would seriously reduce my productivity.

Cheers,
Waldo
-- 
Andrei Sakharov, Exiled 1980-1986, USSR, http://www.aip.org/history/sakharov/
Dmitry Sklyarov, Detained 2001-????, USA, http://www.elcomsoft.com/