On Wed, 2003-12-10 at 16:53, Julian Foad wrote:
> 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.
Since the estimated time to 1.0 is short, I thought we decided to
stabilize on trunk and branch _after_ 1.0. However, if this period is
longer than a few weeks, I would certainly advocate branching as to
not stifle development.
> > 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.
I think Greg snapped at you a bit hard. We know your intentions are
good and the tree is in a healthy state. Let's move on (while slowly,
as to not destabilize the tree ;).
Sander
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Wed Dec 10 17:02:45 2003