Greg Troxel escreveu: > The more serious problem with guile is a lack of focus on timely, stable > releases usable by people who want to integrate it. Plus backwards > compatibility so that people that do integrated it have very little > grief, and the current slib mess.
I have switched from CVS to Git for lilypond development, and it has done wonders for my stable releases. Since it is extremely easy to cherry-pick patches between branches, I back/front port all bugfixes. The releases are even synced: 2.11.29 contains fixes and features, and where possible the same fixes appear in 2.10.29 (stable version) > I wonder if the 'decentralized development' notion is really consistent > with the "papers, please" demand of FSF. Have "assigned" projects used > distributed CM systems? How has that been handled? Decentralized development is a policy decision, and centralized is just as well possible with git. Even more so, because you can actually track the the author (the person writing the patch) separately from the committer (person having write access to the repository). This makes tracking the copyright status (ie. who wrote what) of a project much more transparent. -- Han-Wen Nienhuys - [EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://www.xs4all.nl/~hanwen _______________________________________________ Guile-devel mailing list Guile-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/guile-devel
