Re: [Gimp-developer] segmentation fault when trying to replace deprecated functions in lcms.c

On Thu, Sep 20, 2012 at 12:37 AM, Michael Natterer <mitch gimp org> wrote:
> On Wed, 2012-09-19 at 14:47 -0400, Christopher Curtis wrote:
>> On Wed, Sep 19, 2012 at 2:13 PM, Guillermo Espertino (Gez) <
>> gespertino gmail com> wrote:
>> >  El 19/09/12 10:43, Christopher Curtis escribió:
>> >
>> >  Wouldn't it be better to keep the mainline in a near-releasable state
>> > rather than letting things bit-rot in master, causing 3-year intervals
>> > between releases?
>> >
>> > Moving it to master could mean that mode developers and contributors
>> > realize its importance and they won't let it bitrot.
>> >
>> Well, as I haven't contributed code I'll step out after this comment, but I
>> don't think that merging something that breaks common work flows, seriously
>> degrades performance, and causes segmentation faults belongs in master.
> What makes you think we would merge something to master that would
> definitely crash? We do use some common sense while we sit on our
> fat asses and do nothing while the world waits for the next release.
> --mitch

I don't understand why did i trigger such reactions. I thought it's
obvious that letting more testers to try out the new code would be
only to the GIMPs benefit - and the best way to do it is to publish it
in the gimp git repo. Whether to keep it in separate branch (obviously
temporarily - I didn't mean forever) or merge right away into master -
that should be decided upon by the devs. My idea was nothing unusual
(many new GIMP features were grown initially in separate branches) -
so what's the fuss?

Tomasz B.

[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]