incubator-ooo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Rob Weir <robw...@apache.org>
Subject Re: After AOO 3.4?
Date Mon, 30 Apr 2012 12:35:55 GMT
On Mon, Apr 30, 2012 at 12:55 AM, Juergen Schmidt
<jogischmidt@googlemail.com> wrote:
> On Sunday, 29. April 2012 at 21:10, Pedro Giffuni wrote:
>>
>>
>> --- Sab 28/4/12, Rob Weir <robweir@apache.org> ha scritto:
>>
>> ...
>>
>> > >
>> > > All in all, I think we should focus on stability and
>> > > not on features.
>> > >
>> >
>>
>>
>> What I am meaning here is that our users should not expect
>> false promises like adding an "import Visio documents
>> feature" that simply doesn't work. Of course features
>> from Symphony are considered already pretty stable.
>>
>> > So these (to me) sound more like items for a 3.5 than a
>> > 3.4.1.
>> >
>>
>>
>> I think it all depends on how fast we plan to release 4.0.
>> It looks likely that merging Symophony may be easy for the
>> IBM guys, since symphony already updated theit base OOo,
>> so a release may be fast and the 3.x branch may be short
>> lived. (I don't know for sure though).
>>
>> I think a 3.x branch does make sense in any case but the
>> rule should be clear: no direct commits to the stable
>> branch: in general all changes go first to the trunk
>> and are later merged.
>>
>>
>
> I don't think so, I would do it exactly in the other direction. Fixes for critical issues
or issues that are assigned for a 3.4.1 should be fixed on the related stable branch and also
merged into trunk.
>

I thought Armin ran into some performance-related issues with merging.
 Do we know what direction that was, and what we need to do to avoid
this problem in the future?

-Rob


> But we can discuss if we want code reviews for fixes going into the stable branch before
they are committed.
>
> Juergen
>
>>
>> Pedro.
>

Mime
View raw message