[svn.haxx.se] · SVN Dev · SVN Users · SVN Org · TSVN Dev · TSVN Users · Subclipse Dev · Subclipse Users · this month's index

Re: stabilize means STABILIZE

From: Julian Foad <julianfoad_at_btopenworld.com>
Date: 2003-12-10 16:53:01 CET

Greg Stein wrote:
> We're trying to stabilize and release 1.0. This kind of work appears to be *very* contrary to that.

Of course I am aware that we are trying to stabilise for release 1.0. The problem is knowing where to draw the line between "stabilisation" and "destabilisation". This change was not a critical bug fix but nor was it, in my opinion, significantly destabilising.

I hear your point that we should only be doing critical fixes, but this is not the message I have got from the mailing list so far. I was led to believe that we are going to branch for stabilisation, and that non-critical work can continue on the trunk. I would welcome further clarification.

> Think about it: you had to REVERT the change. What does that say? When was

I apologise for checking in poor code, especially at this stage. However, I did post it for pre-commit review, and specifically said that I wasn't sure about the "memset" part (which, as far as I am aware, is the only bad part). I received only positive feedback. Now, perhaps I didn't leave enough time for other reviewers, and anyway I don't blame review, or lack of it, for my mistakes. I was too hasty, and I'm sorry for it.

- Julian

To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Wed Dec 10 16:47:44 2003

This is an archived mail posted to the Subversion Dev mailing list.

This site is subject to the Apache Privacy Policy and the Apache Public Forum Archive Policy.