On Saturday 14 May 2005 13.14, Max Bowsher wrote:
> > I don't know enough about the installed to judge whether it is
> > appropriate to change it this close to a release, but I still think
> > the r14716 change should be committed to the trunk first.
> Agreed, I think it would be inappropriate to merge the branches until
> the equivalent change is committed to trunk, unless, of course, there
> is an extremely good reason.
> To do otherwise would be to turn the project's usual policy of change
> flow between branches on its head.
I can assure you that I'll do it from trunk from now on and expand my
numbers of WCs.
I have already used this changes for RC3 and RC4 (I felt I had to because
the uninstall option was half broken).
Another issue is that I often have had to change the installer scripts in
order to be able to deliver a workable installer. That situation was
quite bad some one and a half year ago (ie. diffrent runtime files
depending of which compiler that made the binaries). This situation is
much better now, and it's getting even better: Branko gaved me some pre
1.2.0 binaries in february so I could have time to deliver some
realistic code in the trunk in time to the final 1.2.0.
I actually want more freedom when we talk about the installer or maybe
packages tree could have it's own repo or tree?
Received on Sat May 14 19:59:38 2005
- application/pgp-signature attachment: stored