| 1 |
>>>>> On Tue, 30 Nov 2010, Jacob Godserv wrote: |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
>> Just a PMS idler, but my uneducated opinion (in case you wanted one ;) |
| 4 |
>> would be to keep EAPI 5 in master and branch for EAPI 4. |
| 5 |
|
| 6 |
> I should explain that a bit. Master would be the branch that contains |
| 7 |
> everything, and the eapi4 branch would be the to contain just the |
| 8 |
> EAPI4 set of features. |
| 9 |
|
| 10 |
So far the policy was that master should be kept as tidy as possible. |
| 11 |
For example, preparation for EAPI 3 (now called 4) was done in a |
| 12 |
branch. |
| 13 |
|
| 14 |
And we don't know yet what will be in EAPI 5. It's likely that the two |
| 15 |
features just removed from EAPI 4 will be part of it, but we cannot be |
| 16 |
sure (we thought they would be in EAPI 3 ...). Therefore I'd prefer |
| 17 |
not to keep them in master. |
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
Ulrich |
Archives