From kde-core-devel Wed Jul 25 19:27:34 2001 From: Thomas Zander Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2001 19:27:34 +0000 To: kde-core-devel Subject: Re: RFC: The Road Ahead X-MARC-Message: https://marc.info/?l=kde-core-devel&m=99608941205728 MIME-Version: 1 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="--O5XBE6gyVG5Rl6Rj" --O5XBE6gyVG5Rl6Rj Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Wed, Jul 25, 2001 at 07:57:48PM +0200, Lauri Watts wrote: > I would like to suggest a rather radical change to the whole KDE developm= ent=20 > cycle for consideration/evaluation. >=20 > Based loosely on the FreeBSD and Debian models, I propose that CVS is=20 > branched to a -STABLE branch, leaving -HEAD as unstable. =20 As the biggest problem with KDE I have at the moment is that so many things break in the HEAD branch every now and then, this seems a good idea. Maybe the 'why' is not immidiately clear; I have 2 options now; run the latest released code (aka bugfixing branch) or HEAD, and since the time between releases is quite long using the branch (which dies after a month or 2) is not really nice. When this branch stays more alive, and is updated with proven-working code then we create far more stable branch, and more people will use this branch. This naturally leads to better bug-reports, since more people will be using this branch and code there is said to be 'ok'. So I can now report a bug th= at is there as soon as it appears. Now I wait a couple of days since the autho= r=20 will probably fix it himself. --=20 Thomas Zander zander@earthling.n= et The only thing worse than failure is the fear of trying something new --O5XBE6gyVG5Rl6Rj Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (GNU/Linux) Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org iD8DBQE7Xx2mCojCW6H2z/QRAr9iAJ9Q3UGyG/SyF6dHlWcZvOBdsgyKlgCfZYCG R94AUpG6yEcsOdT3qYKND/M= =WmPO -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --O5XBE6gyVG5Rl6Rj--