Re: 0.35 => Beta => 1.0 schedule

> > and they made the point that it's a lot easier to set termination
> > conditions for a branch. The branch gives the release manager more
> > freedom to make stabilization decisions. For example, there have been
> > a whole lot of medium-impact commits in the last few weeks on trunk.
> > If this trend continues, we would face a choice between discouraging
> > people from doing that work, or having lots of code churn just when
> > we're trying to stabilize for release.
>
> This kind of reasoning works when you're looking at stabilizing a
> release for 2-6 weeks. When you're stabilizing for six months, you
> really have to do that on the trunk. I've seen this go bad; too many
> developers stick with the trunk and the release doesn't get enough
> attention, or (less likely) too many developers stick with the release
> branch and the trunk festers with changes whose brokenness isn't
> exposed.

In which case you are actually pointing out that this greatly depends on the
time frame we have in mind. Is there anybody who thinks we can stabilize
within 6 weeks?

bye.

Erik.

-- 
+++ GMX - die erste Adresse für Mail, Message, More +++
Neu: Preissenkung für MMS und FreeMMS! http://www.gmx.net
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org