Re: Trunk still not open

[David Kastrup]

Eli Zaretskii <address@hidden> writes:

>> From: David Kastrup <address@hidden>
>> Date: Fri, 14 Mar 2014 10:35:41 +0100
>> 
>> Well, one could push them to an "undocumented" branch.  That one gets
>> rebased from time to time on the trunk, so any commit from there that
>> has made it with documentation into the trunk will no longer be in there
>> after rebasing.
>
> This could also work, but IMO this alternative is more complicated
> than the other one, and also has the disadvantage that changes appear
> on the trunk with delay, which some users might not like.

Well, that's the point.  A state that isn't an annoyance to anybody is
not likely to change.

> There's also the danger that core developers will need to have 2 very
> active branches to track rather than one.  So we should probably go
> there only if the others cannot possibly work.

This plan will lead to 2 very active branches exactly if the other
strategies do not work.  If the other strategies do work, the
"undocumented" branch will remain dormant anyway.

-- 
David Kastrup