setup goals

Robert Collins robert.collins@itdomain.com.au
Tue May 7 01:04:00 GMT 2002



> -----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



More information about the Cygwin-apps mailing list