Note: Due to technical difficulties, the Archives are currently not up to date.
GMANE provides an alternative service for most mailing lists. c.f. bug 424647
>>>>> On Tue, 30 Nov 2010, Jacob Godserv wrote:
>> Just a PMS idler, but my uneducated opinion (in case you wanted one ;)
>> would be to keep EAPI 5 in master and branch for EAPI 4.
> I should explain that a bit. Master would be the branch that contains
> everything, and the eapi4 branch would be the to contain just the
> EAPI4 set of features.
So far the policy was that master should be kept as tidy as possible.
For example, preparation for EAPI 3 (now called 4) was done in a
branch.
And we don't know yet what will be in EAPI 5. It's likely that the two
features just removed from EAPI 4 will be part of it, but we cannot be
sure (we thought they would be in EAPI 3 ...). Therefore I'd prefer
not to keep them in master.
Ulrich
|
|
