Hello All, On Mon, Aug 31, 2026 at 09:49:06AM -0400, Jim Jagielski wrote:
> > On Aug 31, 2026, at 9:04 AM, Jim Jagielski <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > Opening this discussion up as a separate thread. > > > >> On Aug 31, 2026, at 8:58 AM, Pedro Lino via dev > >> <[email protected]> wrote: > >> > >> I would say that it is easier just to abandon branch 42X and start a new > >> 50X from trunk... > >> > >> > >> All the best, > >> Pedro > > > > I never considered that, but it has some deep merit. AFAIK, there is > > nothing in AOO42X that doesn't exist in trunk, and plenty in trunk that > > doesn't exist in AOO42X, so maybe a clean break from AOO42X is a cleaner > > and more logical path forward to 50X... > > > > Comments? Thoughts? > > > > PS: If desired, I could spend some tokens and ask claude Opus5/Fable5 what > > it thinks of the idea... > > > This is Fable's response: > https://gist.github.com/jimjag/27562670a61d62a5bff2a525867fe30b Thank you for that. If I understood it correctly, we can resume it into the phrase "Nothing in AOO42X is newer than in trunk". I liked the idea to have AOO42X as a new-ish branch that is always supposed to build, whereas trunk may not because it is more ``experimental'' and ``bleeding edge''. For example, trunk does not seem to build today under Windows, using the same environment and build scripts that work with AOO42X. This had worked until some months ago. So I can accept dropping AOO42X and concentrate efforts on trunk, but please, then, let us be more careful with commits that may disrupt builds: new libraries, new compilers etc. I hope I could explain myself clearly. Best regards, -- Arrigo --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
