Re: [README] Sawfish 2.90 branched

On Sun, 24 Oct 2010 16:10:09 +0200, Christopher Roy Bratusek wrote:
> Yesterday I created the "sawfish-2.90" branch. Which will go HEAD
> after a while and will lead to Sawfish 3.0

Isn't it too early? Without gtk+3, there's no reason to call it
Sawfish-3. Renaming of modules happens definitely sometime, so I'd say
it's ok in 1.7.1, or at least 1.8.0 suffices.

If we're to have both 2.90 and 1.7, then we have to decide into which
branch should go new edits. For example, I can soon push Emacs
sawfish.el, a minor bug fix of kde.jl, and new quote-event. It's good
have them sooner (say next Feb), but in order to do so, they have to
go 1.7. Sawfish-3 release is not close.

I don't think edge is so much difficult (neither 3-day hack of
course), so doing in 1.7, or a topic branch is enough. Since we
don't release 1.7.1 soon, it's ok if it takes longer than we presume

A "topic branch" is e.g. "a branch for openGL hack only". (When it's
done, "git rebase" there, and "git merge topic-a" in master.)
Topic branches are better than big one 2.90, since it's easier to see
the status (diff, what's ok to ship and what's not, etc), and they can
be merged one by one to the master.

I'll have a look at gaol-tab issue.

# I've got to invent new tricks. To see what's happened recently, I
# have shell alias "PG" which attaches a tag "pull" to the HEAD and
# pull, and "PP" as "tig pull.."

Teika (Teika kazura)

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