[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       kmail-devel
Subject:    Re: make_it_cool branches created
From:       "Carsten Burghardt" <cb () magic-shop ! de>
Date:       2002-09-10 11:24:40
[Download RAW message or body]


 Auke Jilderda wrote:
> Two branches would be a good thing *if* both branches organise a
> fruitful  co-operation. Interesting question is how to organise
> that?

I consider the new branch as a kind of sandbox where new features
can be tested. If they're proven to be stable enough they can be
merged into the head branch.
Therefore it could be a problem if too many features go rapidly into
the cool-branch because you can't really test things if the basis is
unstable.

>
> On Tuesday 10 September 2002 12:17, Neil Stevens wrote:
> | My intent is to simply report the facts:  Two sides of
> developers are | going forward with development as they see fit.
> Should you release, | users will get more choices among KDE mail
> clients than they ever have | had.  The GNU GPL is locked into
> KMail's codebase, so there will be no | real impediments to one
> side lifting code from the other.
> |
> | If my bias comes through in the article (and I'll probably let
> it), it | will be a positive one.  I think two branches of
> development are a good | thing for KDE and KMail users.  And
> besides, I've been using KMail for | years. If I had very much
> negative to say about it, I'd have switched | to another client
> long ago. :-)
>
> --
> PGP 0x4A34DD6D, http://bunny.sourceforge.net/
> _______________________________________________
> KMail Developers mailing list
> kmail@mail.kde.org
> http://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kmail


-- 
Carsten Burghardt


_______________________________________________
KMail Developers mailing list
kmail@mail.kde.org
http://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kmail
[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]