I don't think this made it to the list. Since it's support of an
argument I made, I feel the need to ensure rdg gets proper
On Sun, 2003-03-23 at 21:00, rdg wrote:
> >From my open source experience, I must aggree w/ Scott Russell
> on the CVS HEAD being unstable.
> On Sun, 2003-03-23 at 03:23, Scott Russell wrote:
> > I'm new to this group, but not to distributed development - in my
> > experience, normally the cvs HEAD is unstable, and stable branches get
> > formed off of it, providing release platforms. Good features and
> > bugfixes get backported to stable branches if someone cares enough to do
> > so, ususally by a release maintenance team, not the dev team.
> > Of course, every project forms it's own culture, and it looks like
> > running critical webware servers directly out of CVS is the norm for
> > some people. I'm forced to wonder how you maintain release control,
> > perform defect tracking, prove code coverage and regression testing and
> > ensure code stability with this policy, though. Aren't these issues
> > what releases and release branches are for?
> > On Sat, 2003-03-22 at 20:16, Tavis Rudd wrote:
> > > On Saturday 22 March 2003 17:06, Tripp Lilley wrote:
> > > > On Wed, 19 Mar 2003, Tavis Rudd wrote:
> > > > > Why don't you create a temporary development branch of the cvs?
> > > >
> > > > I gotta throw a +1 onto this fire :) I synced the other night to the CVS
> > > > head having not seen this message and was bummed when it barfed on me.
> > > > Since I was actively working on something else, I didn't bother to chase
> > > > down the barf, but reverted to 0.8. But I agree with Tavis... radical work
> > > > should (IMHO) go on in a dev branch until it's "close" to stable. Some
> > > > oddball corner cases are okay, but general stability is desirable in the
> > > > mainline.
> > >
> > > Considering the history of several refactorings of WebKit's core over the last
> > > two years - the developers eventually lost interest in them or became too
> > > busy to finish them off and push for a release - I agree with Ian. If his
> > > refactoring of Application.py is going to be in the next release, it should
> > > be in the main branch. Otherwise it'll never get the exposure and serious
> > > testing required.
> > >
> > > > > On Wednesday 19 March 2003 04:04, Ian Bicking wrote:
> > > > > > CVS has been very stable previously. You should not expect that, at
> > > > > > least for the next couple weeks. 0.8 is has all the features that CVS
> > > > > > does (prior to these commits), so use that if you want stability. But
> > > > > > if you don't mind bugs, please help me test!