Re: [Libcdio-devel] RFC: Two releases or one?

[Pete Batard]

On 2012.02.22 15:35, Rocky Bernstein wrote:
> Will try to move forward on this, this week.

OK. I'll try to remove paranoia from my branch soon.

> Removing paranoia was mentioned last November

I see. Hopefully, since this is removal, it won't be too much of a 
headache. Paranoia seems to be working okay with MSVC (after a few 
fixes), but I understand that the reason for the removal is only 
licensing. I'll salvage my fixes and MSVC project files, and submit them 
back to the separate repo.

> > At the moment, I must say I am not sure how you want the -pbatard
> > integration to proceed. I'd prefer being the one pushing the patches, since
> > I'm supposed to have the better view of how they can be broken down,
>
>
> Breaking the patches down is different from pushing patches. Breaking the
> patches down, I totally agree with. Pushing feels a little different.

My bad. I used "pushing" but didn't intend it in a git context.
What I meant by push was only creating patches in my integration branch 
and sending them to the mailing list for review.
I very much want you to be in charge of pushing commits into the 
mainline git repo. I'm also not planning to push anything there unless 
specifically asked to.

> Freezing the master for code is okay. The only outstanding issue I am
> aware of is that Leon was going to revise libcdio.texi for CD-Text. That
> should be totally independent.

Looks that way to me too. Anything that doesn't interfere is of course 
fine with me too.

> Ok. One problem I have had though is getting people to test releases
> beforehand. So can I rely on you to handle the MinGW and Microsoft side?

Definitely. Hopefully, as people find out that libcdio has improved 
Windows support, there will be more adopters and more testers.

Regards,

/Pete