Re: musl 0.9.14 released

[Luca Barbato <lu_zero@gentoo.org>]

On 24/09/13 19:22, Rich Felker wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 24, 2013 at 04:10:03PM +0200, Luca Barbato wrote:
>> On 24/09/13 15:51, John Spencer wrote:
>>>> Sometime soon I also want to focus on what the development and release
>>>> model post-1.0 will be, especially whether we'll aim to maintain a
>>>> 'stable' branch with minimal new features alongside new development.
>>>
>>> having a stable branch which only gets backports of bugfixes makes sense
>>> if we aim for inclusion in conservative distributions.
> 
> And embedded developers -- they don't want to waste their time heavily
> testing a new version with lots of additional features they don't need
> just to fix a bug that might affect their products.
> 
>>> if nothing else, it signals that we care about stability.
> 
> Yes, this is probably the most compelling reason.
> 
>>> otoh it's much more work to maintain...
> 
> Agreed. Hopefully we can minimize this.
> 
>> If you want a stable branch I found _really_ useful having tags such as
>>
>> CC: musl-stable@musl-libc.org
> 
> How is this a "tag"?

Something-Like-This: IsAtagInGit

Or more useful:

Bug-Id:

> I'm skeptical that it would be that much work. Unlike lots of
> projects, musl's codebase intentionally avoids a lot of
> interdependence between modules. If, for example, 80% of bug fix
> commits apply cleanly to both branches, they could just be committed
> to both directly, and that would probably leave, on average, less than
> one commit per week that needs to be backported but doesn't apply
> directly.

I was as well till I tried to maintain two major versions up to date and
released more or less timely.

Hopefully musl won't have _that_ many bug to fix being the code much
cleaner from start.

> If the majority of post-1.0 effort is spent on adding features and
> simplifying/refactoring existing code, I would tend to expect even
> fewer bug-fix commits, but the refactoring might make a higher
> percentage of them require backporting effort.

Yup, that's why I'm afraid =)

lu