On Sun, Oct 28, 2001 at 11:04:20AM +0100, Thomas Roessler wrote: : : On 2001-10-28 04:48:52 -0500, Russell Hoover wrote: : : >Would someone from the mutt developer community mind giving a : >heads-up as to the philosophy or current thinking about this : >situation? : : 1.3.23 is "pretty stable" now - which is why 1.3-branch : announcements come on mutt-users, and why the 1.3 tar balls are not : in the devel/ subdirectory. [...] : In fact, you could legitimately say that there is currently no true : unstable branch - and that's basically because releasing a beta : version (and, even more so) releasing a new stable version will : inevitably uncover those bugs which don't come up with the usage : patterns of developers (or the bold hearts doing beta tests).
I wonder if Russell is thinking of something more akin to the FreeBSD development cycle where there are two branches: FreeBSD-CURRENT and FreeBSD-STABLE. FreeBSD-CURRENT is basically bleeding-edge development where all the wacky new stuff is started. FreeBSD-STABLE is slow-paced development, with more bug fixes and newer features that's gone through some testing in FreeBSD-CURRENT. The releases are created from the FreeBSD-STABLE branch around 3-4 times a year. However, I don't know if Mutt or the Mutt community is large enough to warrant this system. Waiting for such a long time between releases usually means that there's too much work and too few developers, or the next release is a huge radical departure from the previous release (features, code base, etc.). -- Eugene Lee [EMAIL PROTECTED]
