Gnus development mailing list
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
* Re: Oort Gnus branch
@ 2000-10-01 16:44 Sean Doran
  2000-10-01 18:59 ` Kai Großjohann
  2000-10-01 21:41 ` Russ Allbery
  0 siblings, 2 replies; 15+ messages in thread
From: Sean Doran @ 2000-10-01 16:44 UTC (permalink / raw)
  Cc: ding


| Another thought is that maybe we would like to do it like Emacs does
| it.  So, how does Emacs handle the branches?

NetBSD creates a tag to represent a forthcoming release; ongoing day-to-day
"-current" development continues in the trunk, while changes to
the potential-release-tag may be pulled-up only by a "release engineer".
Generally only important bug fixes, rather than new features, are pulled up.

At some point the releng folks are satisfied that the branch is ready
to be tarred up as an actual release, and out goes the latest non-CVS version.

Likewise, critical fixes can be pulled up into older already-released
branches, for the benefit of people who deliberately run older releases
for stability or other reasons.  

	Sean.



^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread

* Re: Oort Gnus branch
  2000-10-01 16:44 Oort Gnus branch Sean Doran
@ 2000-10-01 18:59 ` Kai Großjohann
  2000-10-01 21:41 ` Russ Allbery
  1 sibling, 0 replies; 15+ messages in thread
From: Kai Großjohann @ 2000-10-01 18:59 UTC (permalink / raw)
  Cc: zsh, ding

On Sun, 1 Oct 2000, Sean Doran wrote:

> NetBSD creates a tag to represent a forthcoming release;

Ah, yes.  I know that approach from FreeBSD.  I like it.  But like I
said, adjusting to the way Emacs does it is a worthwhile thought.

kai
-- 
I like BOTH kinds of music.



^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread

* Re: Oort Gnus branch
  2000-10-01 16:44 Oort Gnus branch Sean Doran
  2000-10-01 18:59 ` Kai Großjohann
@ 2000-10-01 21:41 ` Russ Allbery
  1 sibling, 0 replies; 15+ messages in thread
From: Russ Allbery @ 2000-10-01 21:41 UTC (permalink / raw)


Sean Doran <smd@ebone.net> writes:

> NetBSD creates a tag to represent a forthcoming release; ongoing
> day-to-day "-current" development continues in the trunk, while changes
> to the potential-release-tag may be pulled-up only by a "release
> engineer".  Generally only important bug fixes, rather than new
> features, are pulled up.

> At some point the releng folks are satisfied that the branch is ready to
> be tarred up as an actual release, and out goes the latest non-CVS
> version.

For INN, we copied this model and it's worked quite well.  I prefer having
the release on a branch; the difficulty in committing things to the branch
helps make sure that only important fixes go in there.  :)

-- 
Russ Allbery (rra@stanford.edu)             <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>



^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread

* Re: Oort Gnus branch
  2000-10-01 13:56           ` William M. Perry
@ 2000-10-03 22:47             ` Dave Love
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 15+ messages in thread
From: Dave Love @ 2000-10-03 22:47 UTC (permalink / raw)


>>>>> "WMP" == William M Perry <wmperry@aventail.com> writes:

 >> AFAIK, Emacs has no branch at all.

 WMP> It will once I start working on the GTK variant.

For what it's worth, there are already some branches in the tree and
there will eventually be release branches and/or pending branches.  We
didn't start with CVS early enough to have 20.x branches.




^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread

* Re: Oort Gnus branch
  2000-09-30 23:41 ShengHuo ZHU
  2000-10-01  6:14 ` Norbert Koch
@ 2000-10-01 16:49 ` Florian Weimer
  1 sibling, 0 replies; 15+ messages in thread
From: Florian Weimer @ 2000-10-01 16:49 UTC (permalink / raw)


ShengHuo ZHU <zsh@cs.rochester.edu> writes:

> October is coming. Gnus v5.9.0 emerges. It's time for oGnus.  If no
> one objects, I'll create the branch.

Please do not forget to move the contents of lisp/ChangeLog to a file
lisp/ChangeLog.1 when starting Gnus v5.9.0.

Thanks from Florian, who still suffers from small bandwidth. :-/



^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread

* Re: Oort Gnus branch
  2000-10-01 13:20         ` ShengHuo ZHU
@ 2000-10-01 13:56           ` William M. Perry
  2000-10-03 22:47             ` Dave Love
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 15+ messages in thread
From: William M. Perry @ 2000-10-01 13:56 UTC (permalink / raw)
  Cc: ding

ShengHuo ZHU <zsh@cs.rochester.edu> writes:

> Daniel Pittman <daniel@rimspace.net> writes:
> 
> > > Another thought is that maybe we would like to do it like Emacs does
> > > it.  So, how does Emacs handle the branches?
> > 
> > I don't know about Emacs, but XEmacs was doing trunk development on a
> > branch, but plan on moving it to the head branch.
> 
> AFAIK, Emacs has no branch at all.

It will once I start working on the GTK variant.

-bp



^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread

* Re: Oort Gnus branch
  2000-10-01 12:25       ` Daniel Pittman
  2000-10-01 12:34         ` Norbert Koch
@ 2000-10-01 13:20         ` ShengHuo ZHU
  2000-10-01 13:56           ` William M. Perry
  1 sibling, 1 reply; 15+ messages in thread
From: ShengHuo ZHU @ 2000-10-01 13:20 UTC (permalink / raw)


Daniel Pittman <daniel@rimspace.net> writes:

> > Another thought is that maybe we would like to do it like Emacs does
> > it.  So, how does Emacs handle the branches?
> 
> I don't know about Emacs, but XEmacs was doing trunk development on a
> branch, but plan on moving it to the head branch.

AFAIK, Emacs has no branch at all.

ShengHuo



^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread

* Re: Oort Gnus branch
  2000-10-01 12:11     ` Kai Großjohann
  2000-10-01 12:25       ` Daniel Pittman
@ 2000-10-01 12:48       ` Bruce Stephens
  1 sibling, 0 replies; 15+ messages in thread
From: Bruce Stephens @ 2000-10-01 12:48 UTC (permalink / raw)


Kai.Grossjohann@CS.Uni-Dortmund.DE (Kai Großjohann) writes:

[...]

> IMHO, it would be better if the main trunk was always the most current
> development version.  This way, people who use CVS get to test the
> most current version -- that's what CVS is here for, right?  Also, I
> think we expect the 5.8/5.9 lines of development to be rather short,
> no?
> 
> I think this is the first time that a major release is begun while
> using CVS, isn't it?  If it wasn't the first time, we could have
> looked at how it was done previously.
> 
> Another thought is that maybe we would like to do it like Emacs does
> it.  So, how does Emacs handle the branches?

Don't know about Emacs, but XEmacs does it the wrong way around: the
new development is on a branch (release-21-2).  (There's a comment on
the web page somewhere that they plan to change this.)

Your initial paragraph describes it as it should be, IMHO: cut a
branch to support bug fixes and things for pgnus, and ognus should be
on the head.



^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread

* Re: Oort Gnus branch
  2000-10-01 12:25       ` Daniel Pittman
@ 2000-10-01 12:34         ` Norbert Koch
  2000-10-01 13:20         ` ShengHuo ZHU
  1 sibling, 0 replies; 15+ messages in thread
From: Norbert Koch @ 2000-10-01 12:34 UTC (permalink / raw)
  Cc: ding

Daniel Pittman <daniel@rimspace.net> wrote:

Hi!

> I would have to second this. Personal experience with CVS suggests that
> you do a far, far better thing putting the newest development on head.

I absolutely agree to this.
 
> I don't know about Emacs, but XEmacs was doing trunk development on a
> branch, but plan on moving it to the head branch.

As usual it lacks time ;-/

norbert.



^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread

* Re: Oort Gnus branch
  2000-10-01 12:11     ` Kai Großjohann
@ 2000-10-01 12:25       ` Daniel Pittman
  2000-10-01 12:34         ` Norbert Koch
  2000-10-01 13:20         ` ShengHuo ZHU
  2000-10-01 12:48       ` Bruce Stephens
  1 sibling, 2 replies; 15+ messages in thread
From: Daniel Pittman @ 2000-10-01 12:25 UTC (permalink / raw)


On 01 Oct 2000, Kai Großjohann <Kai.Grossjohann@CS.Uni-Dortmund.DE>
wrote:

> On Sun, 1 Oct 2000, ShengHuo ZHU wrote:
> 
>> I think it will be a new branch.
> 
> IMHO, it would be better if the main trunk was always the most current
> development version.  This way, people who use CVS get to test the
> most current version -- that's what CVS is here for, right?  Also, I
> think we expect the 5.8/5.9 lines of development to be rather short,
> no?

I would have to second this. Personal experience with CVS suggests that
you do a far, far better thing putting the newest development on head.

[...]

> Another thought is that maybe we would like to do it like Emacs does
> it.  So, how does Emacs handle the branches?

I don't know about Emacs, but XEmacs was doing trunk development on a
branch, but plan on moving it to the head branch.

        Daniel

-- 
We close our eyes and look in opposite direction.
We ignore the threats and hope they'll go away.
We refuse to pay attention to the dangers we create
in the name of our fathers we kill our children.
        -- Covenant, _Theremin_



^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread

* Re: Oort Gnus branch
  2000-10-01 11:45   ` ShengHuo ZHU
  2000-10-01 12:11     ` Kai Großjohann
@ 2000-10-01 12:19     ` Karl Eichwalder
  1 sibling, 0 replies; 15+ messages in thread
From: Karl Eichwalder @ 2000-10-01 12:19 UTC (permalink / raw)
  Cc: ding

ShengHuo ZHU <zsh@cs.rochester.edu> writes:

> I think it will be a new branch.

As long as only a few hackers will do checkins this works.  Otherwise
it's more secure to "protect" the stable sources making them a branch.

-- 
work : ke@suse.de                          |          ------    ,__o
     : http://www.suse.de/~ke/             |         ------   _-\_<,
home : keichwa@gmx.net                     |        ------   (*)/'(*)




^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread

* Re: Oort Gnus branch
  2000-10-01 11:45   ` ShengHuo ZHU
@ 2000-10-01 12:11     ` Kai Großjohann
  2000-10-01 12:25       ` Daniel Pittman
  2000-10-01 12:48       ` Bruce Stephens
  2000-10-01 12:19     ` Karl Eichwalder
  1 sibling, 2 replies; 15+ messages in thread
From: Kai Großjohann @ 2000-10-01 12:11 UTC (permalink / raw)
  Cc: ding

On Sun, 1 Oct 2000, ShengHuo ZHU wrote:

> I think it will be a new branch.

IMHO, it would be better if the main trunk was always the most current
development version.  This way, people who use CVS get to test the
most current version -- that's what CVS is here for, right?  Also, I
think we expect the 5.8/5.9 lines of development to be rather short,
no?

I think this is the first time that a major release is begun while
using CVS, isn't it?  If it wasn't the first time, we could have
looked at how it was done previously.

Another thought is that maybe we would like to do it like Emacs does
it.  So, how does Emacs handle the branches?

kai
-- 
I like BOTH kinds of music.



^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread

* Re: Oort Gnus branch
  2000-10-01  6:14 ` Norbert Koch
@ 2000-10-01 11:45   ` ShengHuo ZHU
  2000-10-01 12:11     ` Kai Großjohann
  2000-10-01 12:19     ` Karl Eichwalder
  0 siblings, 2 replies; 15+ messages in thread
From: ShengHuo ZHU @ 2000-10-01 11:45 UTC (permalink / raw)


Norbert Koch <nk@LF.net> writes:

> ShengHuo ZHU <zsh@cs.rochester.edu> wrote:
> 
> Hi!
> 
> > October is coming. Gnus v5.9.0 emerges. It's time for oGnus.  If no
> > one objects, I'll create the branch.
> 
> Will this be the main development branch or do we have to check in/out
> to/from a new release tag?

I think it will be a new branch.

ShengHuo



^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread

* Re: Oort Gnus branch
  2000-09-30 23:41 ShengHuo ZHU
@ 2000-10-01  6:14 ` Norbert Koch
  2000-10-01 11:45   ` ShengHuo ZHU
  2000-10-01 16:49 ` Florian Weimer
  1 sibling, 1 reply; 15+ messages in thread
From: Norbert Koch @ 2000-10-01  6:14 UTC (permalink / raw)
  Cc: ding

ShengHuo ZHU <zsh@cs.rochester.edu> wrote:

Hi!

> October is coming. Gnus v5.9.0 emerges. It's time for oGnus.  If no
> one objects, I'll create the branch.

Will this be the main development branch or do we have to check in/out
to/from a new release tag?



^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread

* Oort Gnus branch
@ 2000-09-30 23:41 ShengHuo ZHU
  2000-10-01  6:14 ` Norbert Koch
  2000-10-01 16:49 ` Florian Weimer
  0 siblings, 2 replies; 15+ messages in thread
From: ShengHuo ZHU @ 2000-09-30 23:41 UTC (permalink / raw)



October is coming. Gnus v5.9.0 emerges. It's time for oGnus.  If no
one objects, I'll create the branch.

ShengHuo



^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread

end of thread, other threads:[~2000-10-03 22:47 UTC | newest]

Thread overview: 15+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2000-10-01 16:44 Oort Gnus branch Sean Doran
2000-10-01 18:59 ` Kai Großjohann
2000-10-01 21:41 ` Russ Allbery
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2000-09-30 23:41 ShengHuo ZHU
2000-10-01  6:14 ` Norbert Koch
2000-10-01 11:45   ` ShengHuo ZHU
2000-10-01 12:11     ` Kai Großjohann
2000-10-01 12:25       ` Daniel Pittman
2000-10-01 12:34         ` Norbert Koch
2000-10-01 13:20         ` ShengHuo ZHU
2000-10-01 13:56           ` William M. Perry
2000-10-03 22:47             ` Dave Love
2000-10-01 12:48       ` Bruce Stephens
2000-10-01 12:19     ` Karl Eichwalder
2000-10-01 16:49 ` Florian Weimer

This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).