Subject: Re: Current versus 1.4.2?
To: Greywolf <email@example.com>
From: Bill Studenmund <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 05/24/2000 14:39:40
On Tue, 23 May 2000, Greywolf wrote:
> # i always believed that, as far as support for devices goes, the
> # current "trunk" (from which all releases are grown) contains support
> # for all the stuff that any release ever contained, whereas current has
> # support in it for things that no release (yet) has supported. that,
> # to me at least, makes current a proper superset of the release, or
> # conversely, the release a proper subset of the "trunk". no?
> I think it would be a shame for development effort to have been wasted
> to provide something in -current which will never see the light of
> day in a release (well, something that works/is good/is worthwhile).
?? Each main release (1.0, 1.1, 1.2, 1.3, 1.4, 1.5) is a freeze of current
when the release was branched, plus bug fixes/enhancements which went in
later. 1.5 will contain everything in -current as of the day of the
branch, plus bug fixes or enhancements added after the branch and before
> I realise that -current is in a state of constant flux, but how are
> -current and the release path ever reconciled? Isn't there usually
> a snap of -current just before version M.m is released which is then
> the frozen public-current tree while some development happens in the
> private-current tree, and about a week after M.m is released,
> public-current gets sync'd with private-current, and what was public-
> current remains as the M.m branch, and the only stuff to further come
> from (release on?) an M.m branch are bugfixes in the form of M.m.r
> branches...? (whew!)
Right. That's what happens. :-) Except what you're refering to as
"public-current" is really sup. The difference is that now, with anoncvs,
the cvs branch is still available while sup is showing the release branch.