My own efforts are simply "coding as I go", so I'm just working until
the branch occurs. My changes are very incremental, and generally
non-stabilizing (okay, fine... so I broke it yesterday :-P). I'm not
expecting to get the new pristine stuff in there unless the branch is
going to be a few weeks out.
Right now, "all" of the activity is around the tree conflict work.
Like myself, I suspect others are just "filling in".
So. Ask those guys :-)
Cheers,
-g
On Thu, Nov 13, 2008 at 6:36 AM, Hyrum K. Wright
<hyrum_wright_at_mail.utexas.edu> wrote:
> Hyrum K. Wright wrote:
>> [second verse, same as the first...]
>>
>> Alright folks, we're branching 1.6.x this week. Here's the schedule of events:
> [snip]
>
> So, people will probably notice the conspicuous lack of a branch yesterday. It
> seems there's more issues outstanding than just failing tests and incomplete docs.
>
> Let's take a step back. Given the outstanding items (TODO-1.6), what is a
> realistic branch date? I think it's frustrating and counterproductive to keep
> setting and ignoring branch dates, so let's set one that will hold *and live by
> it*! I don't know what is realistic for people, 2 weeks out? A month? Next
> week? Please chime in.
>
> -Hyrum
>
>
> PS - If you've got things which need to get done before 1.6 branches, please add
> them to TODO-1.6. Even if you're planning on doing them, it will help the rest
> of us understand where we sit as we prepare to branch. Thanks.
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe_at_subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help_at_subversion.tigris.org
Received on 2008-11-13 20:57:57 CET