On Thursday 2009-06-25 19:08, Jan Engelhardt wrote: >On 2009-06-10 12:19:59, Patrick wrote: >>On Wednesday 2009-06-10 14:16, Jan Engelhardt wrote: >>> >>>Git is not as castrated as Hg when it comes to branches, so why not >>>make a "stable" branch that is then regularly merged into master? :) >> >>I don't see why that would currently be necessary. We're talking >>about a few days, and in fact I'd rather have people test the >>current code before the release instead of hacking on new things :) > >Yeah but in general? The - judging from their version numbers - >x.y.z.S stable versions like 1.4.3.1 used to receive lots of new >features because there is just master, in which case it should >have been the new 1.4.4 already. >So either z is bumped more often and S-versions will not >be released, or S only receives fixes, necessiting a separate branch. >Objections? It would be cool to get an answer here so I know how to twingle patchbranches that I'd like to submit. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netfilter-devel" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
