Re: stable vs. experimental archive

[Robert T. Short]

Hi Jaroslav,

I am very much in favor of the idea of having a stable branch and an 
experimental branch providing the overhead doesn't get to be too much.  
I don't have too much experience with open-source collaborations of this 
type, so don't really know how this will work.

I think your alternative number 1 is the best if you can pull it off.  
Number 2 is the clear best second choice.

Bob
--
Robert T. Short
PhaseLocked Systems

Jaroslav Hajek wrote:
> Hello,
>
> following the conversation and my proposal
> http://www.nabble.com/stable-branch-release-policy--was-Re%3A-Possible-bug-in-intersect--td23009036.html#a23072785
> I would like to carry on the discussion about setting up a second
> official "experimental" repository to resolve issues with development
> & stability. I see the following options:
>
> 1. create a secondary "experimental" repo on Savannah (if this can be done)
> 2. create an "experimental" branch in the savannah repo (and maybe
> rename the "default" branch to "stable")
> 3. host the "experimental" repo elsewhere (TW's)
> X. forget about the stable & experimental proposal, use a different
> development/maintenance model
>
> could you please share your opinions/votes? if anyone votes for X.,
> please describe your idea.
>
> I think 1. is clearly winner if it can be done. 2 and 3 are
> compromises. My vote is 2 if 1 is not possible.
>
> cheers
>
>