1 |
Doh! sent incorrectly... resending to the list |
2 |
|
3 |
On Sun, 2013-12-29 at 03:31 -0800, Douglas Freed wrote: |
4 |
> On Dec 29, 2013 3:19 AM, "Markos Chandras" <hwoarang@g.o> |
5 |
> wrote: |
6 |
> > |
7 |
> > On 12/19/2013 02:31 AM, Jorge Manuel B. S. Vicetto wrote: |
8 |
> > > So, my "decision" is that all of us that were using master and |
9 |
> relied on |
10 |
> > > it, move to a catalyst release version or to a new branch to track |
11 |
> > > catalyst-2 development. I had hoped to get some discussion about |
12 |
> this on |
13 |
> > > the meeting, but since I don't want us to wait so long, let's |
14 |
> discuss |
15 |
> > > this branch through e-mail. |
16 |
> > |
17 |
> > When you say "new branch" you mean the 3.0 ? When I joined the team |
18 |
> I |
19 |
> > was told the 3.0 branch was supposed to be used by "us" to provide |
20 |
> > feedback and improve it as this was going to be the next master. Is |
21 |
> this |
22 |
> > still the case? I have been using it all along to provide the MIPS |
23 |
> stages. |
24 |
> > |
25 |
> > -- |
26 |
> > Regards, |
27 |
> > Markos Chandras |
28 |
> |
29 |
> Yeah, 3.0 is still destined to become master. I believe the plan is |
30 |
> to take logical series from the 3.0 branch and submit them to the |
31 |
> catalyst list for review and then get merged into master. It's nice |
32 |
> to know that it works for a full stage3 and that we have release |
33 |
> stages using it without issue. |
34 |
> |
35 |
> -dwfreed |
36 |
> |
37 |
|
38 |
Yeah, the "new branch" he referred to would be a 2.x branch to fix |
39 |
anything needed to make a new 2.x release. But only if it was needed |
40 |
before a 3.0 release was ready to be made. |
41 |
|
42 |
And, A big thank you (from me) for running the 3.0 code since last |
43 |
spring. Maybe some others in the releng team will take note of that and |
44 |
not be quite so scared about the code changes coming for |
45 |
review/inclusion into master. |