Mailing-List: contact cygwin-apps-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
Sender: cygwin-apps-owner AT cygwin DOT com
List-Subscribe: <mailto:cygwin-apps-subscribe AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Archive: <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/cygwin-apps/>
List-Post: <mailto:cygwin-apps AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Help: <mailto:cygwin-apps-help AT cygwin DOT com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/lists.html#faqs>
Mail-Followup-To: cygwin-apps AT cygwin DOT com
Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin-apps AT cygwin DOT com
From: "Gary R. Van Sickle" <g DOT r DOT vansickle AT worldnet DOT att DOT net>
To: "Cygwin-Apps" <cygwin-apps AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>
Subject: RE: setup goals
Date: Mon, 6 May 2002 20:54:50 -0500
Message-ID: <NCBBIHCHBLCMLBLOBONKEEFLCOAA.g.r.vansickle@worldnet.att.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
In-Reply-To: <FC169E059D1A0442A04C40F86D9BA7600C5FF7@itdomain003.itdomain.net.au>
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000
Importance: Normal

[snip]

I agree wholeheartedly with the primary and secondary goals, but...

> Patches to HEAD that break the first two goals, will only be accepted on
> a 'temporary break until xyz' basis.
> Patches to HEAD (or checkings from non-reviewed committers such as
> Chris) that break the first two will be accidental (I hope!).
[snip]
> Lastly, on development branches, anything goes, I don't care if a
> development branch even builds. (Currently we don't have any development
> branches).

...I either completely *don't* agree with this or am confused as to the accepted
practices in CVS land.  Isn't HEAD sorta the local (to the maintainer)
development 'branch' for the next revision?  If not, what's the non-HEAD trunk
for?  Shouldn't people be submitting patches to non-HEAD instead of HEAD?

Ooof, I'm getting a HEADache....

(hehheheheeeee, oh man Gair you still got it!)

--
Gary R. Van Sickle
Brewer.  Patriot.