On Tue, 2006-11-14 at 19:37 +0100, Tilman Sauerbeck wrote:
That is, it would be moved in the "2.3" branches of core.git and opt.git. No need to do that change in the 2.2 branches.
Speaking of which, is there a schedule for branching 2.3, let alone start developing it? Also, in the future, would it be better to branch at the time of release, instead of 9 months later? E.g. development would happen in HEAD and 2.3 would be branched when the ISO is made available. This would make the "I just want a stable distro" guys happy while allowing more experiments during (and give more time for) development. The 2.1 -> 2.2 and 2.2 -> 2.3 cycle have been mostly like this: branch -> (3 months) major core updates -> release -> (9 months) version bumps Proposed cycle would be: (12 months) development -> branch -> security fixes This is how most projects do their release cycles and my guess is that CRUX did it in the previous style because Per developed privately, released and then committed updates till the next one was ready.