CVS access policy, branching/tagging, code review, etc.

[John Dennis]

On Tue, 2004-03-02 at 13:29, Keith Packard wrote:

> Hmm.  I'd rather see the release done on HEAD; otherwise, there's work to 
> be done to make HEAD current after the release, which seems error prone.

The usual procedure is to have a code freeze date for the release and
then branch for that release. Continuing development occurs on HEAD,
release bug fixes occur on the branch. When/if release bug fixes are
merged back to HEAD is a working policy decision.

Thus I agree with Egbert, releases should be branched, HEAD is never a
release vehicle. 
-- 
John Dennis <jdennis@redhat.com>