On Mon, 2005-07-18 at 11:08 -0700, C Y wrote:
> Seeing as we now have a number of significant patches that have been
> outstanding for a while (for example the IO and prompt work) I would
> like to suggest we consider branching cvs into a 5.9.2 tree and the
> usual experimental tree.
I agree that a branch for 5.9.2 is in order.
> I haven't heard from Jim in a while so
> perhaps there is a plan I am not aware of, but at this point I
> personally would prefer to get the patches committed and bounce them
> around/break them than have them linger so long. A 5.9.2 tree would
> allow for more careful mergers for the release and let us get a little
> more daring with the main cvs trunk.
Originally, I thought we wouldn't deal with multiple branches until we
reached 6.0. That now seems naive. We probably should have started a
5.9.2 branch quite some time ago.
> Jim, if you're around does this sound like a good plan?
Obviously, I haven't managed to be really "around" in quite some time,
but yes, it is a good plan.
--Jim