in7y118 at public.uni-hamburg.de
Wed Jun 23 13:05:15 CEST 2004
On Wed, 23 Jun 2004, Thomas Vander Stichele wrote:
> Also, we're not doing "aggregate" releases anymore, since it makes
> releasing and testing incredibly more painful. We've decided that more
> than a year ago, but we never actually started doing for various lame
> excuses. I want to keep on track wrt. that decision.
I'd like to keep them together for 2 simple reasons:
1) Every developer runs cvs HEAD of both core and plugins. Because of
this, the combination is tested much better and we don't have any problems
with keeping added API out of plugins unil release and other
2) Keep the freeze times short. If we do releases every 3 weeks and don't
release aggregated, we'll freeze a different package every week. I think
that'd be a bit confusing for the devels.
I'm not sure why it is more work either. You have to make sure the core
works with the plugins in every case. Where does the more work come from?
> I agree, and have asked for this in the past as well. The problem is
> people do not seem to always respect it.
If they don't we kick them and then revert. A bit more work, but it'll
> Personally, I feel we should a) freeze HEAD and b) branch for release.
> It also helps in making the merge-from-release-to-HEAD less painful.
I don't think I want to do so much work and setup a branch just to fix
release bugs. I don't think other developers want either.
and I don't see why a branch is necessary. If we need to apply patches,
we want them in HEAD, too. And if we need to back something out, because
it's not release quality, I don't want it in HEAD either. So why branch?
More information about the gstreamer-devel