<!DOCTYPE html>
<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/xhtml; charset=utf-8">
</head>
<body>
<div style="font-family:sans-serif"><div style="white-space:normal">
<p dir="auto">On 12 Jul 2021, at 13:36, Faré wrote:</p>
<blockquote style="border-left:2px solid #777; color:#777; margin:0 0 5px; padding-left:5px">
<p dir="auto">Would the "stable" branch be any different from the "release" branch?<br>
If it's actually a not-so-stable development branch for 3.3 while a<br>
separate branch contains development for 3.4, then maybe indeed<br>
calling branches v3.3 and v3.4 make more sense.</p>
</blockquote>
<p dir="auto">Yes, it would, because this branch would be where we put fixes to the released branch while, on <code style="background-color:#F7F7F7; border-radius:3px; margin:0; padding:0 0.4em" bgcolor="#F7F7F7">main</code>, we develop code for 3.4.</p>
<p dir="auto">I was thinking of not calling the branch <code style="background-color:#F7F7F7; border-radius:3px; margin:0; padding:0 0.4em" bgcolor="#F7F7F7">v3.3</code> because if we ever get past 3.4, we would want a maintenance branch for 3.4, while <code style="background-color:#F7F7F7; border-radius:3px; margin:0; padding:0 0.4em" bgcolor="#F7F7F7">main</code> would be for 3.5 or 4 depending on what the future holds.</p>
<p dir="auto">I have a mild preference for having the maintenance branch, whatever we call it, just point to whatever has been released and is accumulating bug fixes. I figured that having a <code style="background-color:#F7F7F7; border-radius:3px; margin:0; padding:0 0.4em" bgcolor="#F7F7F7">stable</code> would be like having a <code style="background-color:#F7F7F7; border-radius:3px; margin:0; padding:0 0.4em" bgcolor="#F7F7F7">main</code>, instead of renaming <code style="background-color:#F7F7F7; border-radius:3px; margin:0; padding:0 0.4em" bgcolor="#F7F7F7">main</code> to whatever the upcoming version number is. Just like Debian has <code style="background-color:#F7F7F7; border-radius:3px; margin:0; padding:0 0.4em" bgcolor="#F7F7F7">stable</code> and <code style="background-color:#F7F7F7; border-radius:3px; margin:0; padding:0 0.4em" bgcolor="#F7F7F7">testing</code>, but the precise meaning of these changes over time.</p>
<p dir="auto">I'm willing to be argued out of this, as I was argued out of <code style="background-color:#F7F7F7; border-radius:3px; margin:0; padding:0 0.4em" bgcolor="#F7F7F7">dev</code> in favor of <code style="background-color:#F7F7F7; border-radius:3px; margin:0; padding:0 0.4em" bgcolor="#F7F7F7">main</code>, but I am not convinced by the arguments for <code style="background-color:#F7F7F7; border-radius:3px; margin:0; padding:0 0.4em" bgcolor="#F7F7F7">v3.3</code> versus <code style="background-color:#F7F7F7; border-radius:3px; margin:0; padding:0 0.4em" bgcolor="#F7F7F7">stable</code> yet. What makes us need <code style="background-color:#F7F7F7; border-radius:3px; margin:0; padding:0 0.4em" bgcolor="#F7F7F7">v3.3</code> instead of stable if we don't need <code style="background-color:#F7F7F7; border-radius:3px; margin:0; padding:0 0.4em" bgcolor="#F7F7F7">v3.4</code> instead of <code style="background-color:#F7F7F7; border-radius:3px; margin:0; padding:0 0.4em" bgcolor="#F7F7F7">main</code>?</p>
<blockquote style="border-left:2px solid #777; color:#777; margin:0 0 5px; padding-left:5px">
<p dir="auto">—♯ƒ • François-René ÐVB Rideau •Reflection&Cybernethics• <a href="http://fare.tunes.org" style="color:#777">http://fare.tunes.org</a><br>
The knowable universe is everything, as far as we can know.</p>
<p dir="auto">On Mon, Jul 12, 2021 at 2:13 PM Martin Simmons <a href="mailto:martin@lispworks.com" style="color:#777">martin@lispworks.com</a> wrote:</p>
<blockquote style="border-left:2px solid #777; color:#999; margin:0 0 5px; padding-left:5px; border-left-color:#999">
<blockquote style="border-left:2px solid #777; color:#BBB; margin:0 0 5px; padding-left:5px; border-left-color:#BBB">
<blockquote style="border-left:2px solid #777; color:#BBB; margin:0 0 5px; padding-left:5px; border-left-color:#BBB">
<blockquote style="border-left:2px solid #777; color:#BBB; margin:0 0 5px; padding-left:5px; border-left-color:#BBB">
<blockquote style="border-left:2px solid #777; color:#BBB; margin:0 0 5px; padding-left:5px; border-left-color:#BBB">
<blockquote style="border-left:2px solid #777; color:#BBB; margin:0 0 5px; padding-left:5px; border-left-color:#BBB">
<p dir="auto">On Mon, 12 Jul 2021 19:52:01 +0200, Rudolf Schlatte said:</p>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<p dir="auto">Cancel-Lock: sha1:dqYu7Py9JNAyZJWALyW1kLx3PD8=</p>
<p dir="auto">"Robert Goldman" <a href="mailto:rpgoldman@sift.info" style="color:#BBB">rpgoldman@sift.info</a><br>
writes:</p>
<blockquote style="border-left:2px solid #777; color:#BBB; margin:0 0 5px; padding-left:5px; border-left-color:#BBB">
<p dir="auto">If stable seems bad, is there another name we could use to avoid renaming? Like maint for "maintenance"?</p>
<p dir="auto">I don't love maint, because it's too close to main, and it seems like main has an edge in familiarity if not in meaningfulness.</p>
<p dir="auto">legacy?</p>
<p dir="auto">Unless we can come up with something better than stable, it seems like the least-worst alternative. But there's all week to come up with something better!</p>
</blockquote>
<p dir="auto">In the first email you said that the purpose of that branch was to<br>
permit continuation of the 3.3 release series, so maybe call the branch<br>
"v3.3"? That way, there can be multiple such branches without resorting<br>
to "stable", "oldstable" etc. names.</p>
</blockquote>
<p dir="auto">Yes, that's the kind of name I meant.</p>
<p dir="auto">Or include the stableness in the name with something like "stable/3.3"<br>
(c.f. FreeBSD).</p>
<p dir="auto">--<br>
Martin Simmons<br>
LispWorks Ltd<br>
<a href="http://www.lispworks.com/" style="color:#999">http://www.lispworks.com/</a></p>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</div>
</div>
</body>
</html>