Re: PEAR development release

On Wednesday, August 27, 2003 19:14, Martin Jansen wrote: > On Wed Aug 27, 2003 at 02:0045PM +0200, Tomas V.V.Cox wrote: >> On Tuesday, August 26, 2003 20:03, Greg Beaver wrote: >> >> > There have been a significant number of patches to the core of PEAR, >> > both my patches, and Marshall's XML_RPC patches. >> >> If the XML_RPC patches were good and someone reviewed them please go >> ahead. We could release a "beta" version with them. Btw if Marshall >> wants and someone has reviewed his code, I'd invite him for being the >> new XML_RPC maintainer. > So we are going to fork XML_RPC from usefulinc.com? Well, the lastest version from them was at January 12, 2003, so I guess it's more a continuation of a "freezed" proyect than a "fork", much like the GD stuff. XML_RPC for us is a PFC package required for the main PEAR class, we should take care on having it up-to-date and bug free. >> > I'd like to see these committed to a branch of cvs, and a development >> > release of PEAR packaged up and released to test the new features and >> > allow for both debugging and refinement without disturbing anything on >> > HEAD. A branch is the best solution because it can easily be merged, >> > and just as easily be dropped. Any people on vacation will not need to >> > wade through thousands of emails in order to find the patches. It's all >> > around a better solution than the current holding pattern. >> >> > I'd like to call the branch PEAR-1.3-devel, unless there is a better idea. >> >> Any approved feature/change should go to MAIN, we can't manage 3 >> branches, it's a mess. > I don't see a problem with having a temporary branch for Greg. My point is: if a feature is appoved commit it to HEAD, if not approved do not commit. I don't see the need of another branch. -- Tomas V.V.Cox mailto:cox@idecnet.com