This is the mail archive of the
cygwin-apps@cygwin.com
mailing list for the Cygwin project.
RE: setup goals
- From: "Robert Collins" <robert dot collins at itdomain dot com dot au>
- To: "Gary R. Van Sickle" <g dot r dot vansickle at worldnet dot att dot net>,"Cygwin-Apps" <cygwin-apps at sources dot redhat dot com>
- Date: Tue, 7 May 2002 18:04:15 +1000
- Subject: RE: setup goals
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Gary R. Van Sickle [mailto:g.r.vansickle@worldnet.att.net]
> Sent: Tuesday, May 07, 2002 11:55 AM
> > Patches to HEAD that break the first two goals, will only
> be accepted
> > on a 'temporary break until xyz' basis. Patches to HEAD (or
> checkings
> > from non-reviewed committers such as
> > Chris) that break the first two will be accidental (I hope!).
> [snip]
> > Lastly, on development branches, anything goes, I don't care if a
> > development branch even builds. (Currently we don't have any
> > development branches).
>
> ...I either completely *don't* agree with this or am confused
> as to the accepted practices in CVS land. Isn't HEAD sorta
> the local (to the maintainer) development 'branch' for the
> next revision? If not, what's the non-HEAD trunk for?
> Shouldn't people be submitting patches to non-HEAD instead of HEAD?
Anyone here should be submitting patches against HEAD. If we setup (no
pun intended) a sub-project to develop something new, then we might make
a branch just for that - a development branch - that is allowed to be
completely broken if needed. Like I said, we don't have any of those at
the moment.
Rob