On Wed, Jan 26, 2011 at 2:05 PM, Gregory Farnum <gregory.farnum@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Wed, Jan 26, 2011 at 2:01 PM, Sage Weil <sage@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> How about something like: >> >> master - unstable (and get rid of 'unstable' branch) >> testing or stable - bug fixes to last release. >> rc or next - what will be the next major release > > It seems a little weird/worrisome to me that the default branch would > be one that sees as much churn as unstable gets. Maybe that's not > actually an issue for people, but I'd naively rather see master be > what rc is right now than what unstable is right now. The mindset users have is something like this: Do I want something stable? If so, then download the source code tarball for the previous release (or RPM, or DPKG, or whatever.) If not, then get the code directly out of the source code repository. Theoretically, you could get the stable version out of the source code repository. But when was the last time you did that (for a project you weren't developing)? That's why the tradition is for master / SVN HEAD to be unstable. cheers, Colin -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe ceph-devel" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
