On Tuesday 12 May 2009, Øyvind Harboe wrote: > I don't know when the cats can be herded into a 0.2 release > at this point, but I'm pretty sure it's a month away at least.
Hmm, if you don't know ... then who could? The process *does* seem, for now, as if it's largely "commit patches to SVN" without any publicly defined goals/targets or visible criteria. Zack's "list" seemed useful in terms of having some kind of direction be defined. But that's distinct from defining release criteria, or merge criteria. Right *now*, what criteria are being used to choose whether to merge a patch, reject it, or hold it back until the next release? Example: there was a patch a while back (from Dick Hollenbeck) that included about 60K of ft2232 and TMS sequencing updates ... and gratuitous changes to whitespace, and surely other things. I don't know of many projects which wouldn't also reject such patches with "please split into smaller patches so this can be reviewed", as happened. If that *had* been split and resubmitted ... there seems to be no process in place to say which changes are safe to merge *now* versus which can't merge because they'd destabilize release plans, versus which are worth merging even if they *do* destabilize things (because e.g. fixing TMS bugs is critical). - Dave _______________________________________________ Openocd-development mailing list Openocd-development@lists.berlios.de https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/openocd-development
