[Nut-upsdev] keeping branches in sync (was Re: [nut-commits] svn commit r1631 - branches/Experimental)

[Arnaud Quette]

2008/12/19 Charles Lepple <clepple at gmail.com>:
> On Thu, Dec 18, 2008 at 4:57 PM, Arjen de Korte <nut+devel at de-korte.org> wrote:
>> Citeren Charles Lepple <clepple at gmail.com>:
>>
>>> Also (and this is mostly for Arjen), should we build
>>> branches/Experimental in Buildbot? Would it make sense to have two
>>> boxes per platform - one for the trunk, and one for experimental?
>>
>> I would prefer not to.
>>
>> Now that trunk is being used to extract the next 'stable' release, I felt
>> the need to have an 'incubator' where drivers that are being
>> developed/tested can live until the are mature enough to be merged into the
>> trunk. I even thought of naming this 'adkorte-guest' so that it is clear
>> that it is 'my' area.
>
> Not a problem.
>
> At some point after 2.4.0 is released, we may still want to split
> things off so that we don't make large changes in the 2.4.x series of
> releases, but it sounds like that was not your intention with
> branches/Experimental.

I'm all for since I don't want to see the FD_SETSIZE (or alike) case
happening again, and forcing us to wait for a major release... but I
also want to quickly start working on 2.6.

we want to keep things stable (at least in the core) upon new minor releases.
though we can still add new satellites features, not impacting the core...

cheers
-- 
Linux / Unix Expert R&D - Eaton - http://www.eaton.com/mgeops
Network UPS Tools (NUT) Project Leader - http://www.networkupstools.org/
Debian Developer - http://people.debian.org/~aquette/
Free Software Developer - http://arnaud.quette.free.fr/