Re: unicode-2 and multitty

[David Kastrup <dak@gnu.org>]

Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> writes:

>> From: David Kastrup <dak@gnu.org>
>> Date: Fri, 04 May 2007 11:13:27 +0200
>> 
>> While the release is "imminent", letting HEAD and the release
>> branch diverge would likely be impolite.
>
> ??? I thought the main reason for cutting the release branch was to
> allow development on the trunk without affecting the release.  So
> what's impolite about committing changes on the trunk now?

We are not talking about "committing changes" but a branch merge.  At
the current point of time, the decision "commit to both HEAD and
RELEASE_22 branch or just one" is easy to make on a case by case base.
After merging a branch into HEAD, this will become harder.  Since we
have had quite a few commits into both locations that clearly are not
prerelease fixes, it pretty much requires Richard to decide what
should go where in the case of those two.  But Richard is a scarce
resource, so it does not make sense that everybody waits for his word
on everything.  Things would be different if Richard clearly stated
that we can commence with the _serious_ work on HEAD.

So instead of having developers idle until such a time, I proposed
creating a branch for the impeding work.  Personally, I would consider
HEAD the more logical choice.  Which of the two it should be is
Richard's call.  Doing neither would seem like a waste of developer
resources.

>> Would it be better etiquette to create or use a different mailing
>> list than this one for discussing such work on the unicode-2
>> branch?
>
> Please don't start another schism.

A schism?  Thinking about how developers can start working in the
previously agreed upon way without disrupting those who still are
focused on the delayed release process seems hardly like a schism.
There seems to be little sense in most developers idling while the
remaining problems concerning the release are still being sorted out.
Emacs has a variety of branches in CVS: those hardly constitute
schisms.

There is currently a separate mailing list for the multitty branch
(which is not yet in CVS but really should go there now, I think):
discussion of its problems have been kept off this list for now.  I
don't think that it is amiss to ask whether the merge discussion
should go on there, here or elsewhere.

-- 
David Kastrup