Hi Randy,
Hi Viktor,
I understand that the developers want to get as much done as quickly
possible and therefore patching the stable version would take them
longer. However, having someone else patch another person's fixes is
very inefficient - The best time to patch the stable version is at
the same time the fix is being applied to the current build - In
most cases, it's a simple matter of cutting and pasting code.
For me this is impossible. It'd take so much time to
do everything twice (edits, commits, builds, test runs,
release), that it's simple impossible. Plus, since - in
case of me at least -, I wouldn't (and cannot) use the
other branch so it would very likely go unstable quite
quickly.
I fully agree that it's much better to have two such
branches going in parallel, but it's an expensive
feature.
It's however (and IMO) not impossible for someone to
gather interesting or critical patches and apply them
to 1.0.x branch. This needs a maintainer for the 1.0.x,
who is better be someone who is also using it.
What core developers can do (myself included), is to
mark critical patches with [TOMERGE 1.0.x] tags to
make it easy for maintainer to identity patches. I used
to do this in the beginning, but since there is no
1.0.x maintainer, I stopped.
Brgds,
Viktor
_______________________________________________
Harbour mailing list
Harbour@harbour-project.org
http://lists.harbour-project.org/mailman/listinfo/harbour
