On Tuesday 01 March 2005 00:40, Diego Novillo wrote: > Nathanael Nerode wrote: > > "Although maintaining a development branch, including merging new changes > > from the mainline, is somewhat burdensome, the absolute worst case is > > that such a branch will have to be maintained for four months." > > This is wrong. There is no limit on how long a development branch may > need to live.
It's not about how long the branch may live, but the most time it may have to be maintained before being merged. The four months is based on the six-month development cycle with branches only merged in stage 1. In the plan, if you miss stage1, you in theory only have to maintain the branch through stage2 and stage 3, which is indeed four months. Gr. Steven
