Re: fast-forward only policy

[Shaun McCance <shaunm gnome org>]

On Tue, 2009-05-05 at 23:47 +0300, Felipe Contreras wrote:
> On Tue, May 5, 2009 at 11:18 PM, Behdad Esfahbod <behdad behdad org> wrote:
> > On 05/05/2009 04:12 PM, Felipe Contreras wrote:
> >>
> >> On Tue, May 5, 2009 at 11:00 PM, Behdad Esfahbod
> >> <behdad esfahbod gmail com>  wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> case that's not a compelling argument; you can still have branches
> >>>>> '1-2' and 'gnome-2-26'.
> >>>
> >>> Quick note.  If we're going to have short branch names (as I'm planning
> >>> to
> >>> use for pango), it should be "1.2", not "1-2".
> >>
> >> Yeap, IMHO pango-1-2<  1-2<  1.2<  stable
> >
> > It's nice to have "stable", but we need a fixed name for those branches too.
> > I'd love to see "stable" always be an alias for the latest stable branch,
> > but that doesn't obviate the need for "1.2" or pango-1-2.
> 
> Yes, if you *must* have a branch for each single stable major release
> you have, then it would be nice to have another branch (pointer) to
> the latest one.
> 
> However, why do you need a "1.2" branch when you already have a PANGO_1_2_4 tag?

Because somebody might want to commit something for
Pango 1.2.5.  Bear in mind that, even if developers
aren't planning anything else for a stable series,
translators and documentation writers might still
add things.

--
Shaun