On 2003-12-18 14:57:52 +0000 paul POULAIN <paul.poulain@free.fr> wrote:
I think we should have a 3 steps structure : 1 - stable version 2 - almost stable version 3 - probably broken version
I think this is too much. I think it strains us to support two branches, let alone three. Have a stable series and one open for development and let people do radical restructuring attempts in their own space. I think Debian has 5 branches (stable, frozen, testing, unstable, experimental) as well as people using private staging areas. They're a distribution rather than a development project, so maybe not a good example. I'm leaving the RM questions alone: I don't have time right now to think about such things, thanks to bug 662. -- MJR/slef My Opinion Only and possibly not of any group I know. Please http://remember.to/edit_messages on lists to be sure I read http://mjr.towers.org.uk/ gopher://g.towers.org.uk/ slef@jabber.at Creative copyleft computing services via http://www.ttllp.co.uk/