[Nut-upsdev] NUT and Automake

[Arnaud Quette]

2006/11/3, Charles Lepple <clepple at gmail.com>:
> On 11/2/06, Peter Selinger <selinger at mathstat.dal.ca> wrote:
> > Arnaud Quette wrote:
> > > according to our discussion about the 2.0.5 release (simply a release
> > > of the current trunk), it would be better to release 2.0.5 before that
> > > merge (and the ones I mentionned before, the new conf and HAL
> > > branches...)
> > >
> > > Arnaud
> >
> > I agree, but only if the 2.0.5 release happens very soon. The automake
> > branch has already been tested and works.  If we continue not to use
> > it, then I will have to keep synchronizing it with the trunk, which I
> > don't want to do indefinitely.
> >
> > So let me suggest: I will move the automake feature to the trunk on
> > November 30. If 2.0.5 is released before that date, great. If not,
> > then automake will be part of 2.0.5.
> >
> > Does this sound reasonable? -- Peter
>
> Arnaud,
>
> I have to agree with Peter on this. I think the automake changes are
> much less intrusive than the new conf file branch*, and probably the
> HAL code as well (although I admit I have not had a chance to look at
> the latter; if it's just a driver, then it's probably not that big of
> a deal).
>
> * Would people expect conf file formats to change between 2.0.4 and
> 2.0.5? It doesn't seem consistent with our version numbering scheme.
> Or did you mean something else?
>
> I don't want to see the automake branch get too far behind, and it's
> not exactly fair to expect Peter to keep synchronizing if he is not
> delaying the 2.0.5 release himself. Plus, keeping it in a separate
> branch makes it less desirable to branch from the trunk to add a new
> feature.

if we create 2.0.5-pre1 in the Testing branch, by merging the current
trunk (without automake/NewConf/HAL), then the trunk is "unfreezed"
for merging the above branches.
Thus, no more need to sync these branches with the trunk, and also no
big changes (like automake/new conf...) in 2.0.5.

I also want to see automake getting into the trunk asap, as for the
other branches, though as you said these are more intrusive, and need
more merging work...

As told before, I'm still stuck on the MGE NSM v3 release, so if you
(Charles or Peter) start the trunk merge on the Testing branch, that
would help.

Arnaud
-- 
Linux / Unix Expert - MGE UPS SYSTEMS - R&D Dpt
Network UPS Tools (NUT) Project Leader - http://www.networkupstools.org/
Debian Developer - http://people.debian.org/~aquette/
OpenSource Developer - http://arnaud.quette.free.fr/