From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Stefan Monnier Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Release procedure. Date: Sun, 06 May 2007 22:25:50 -0400 Message-ID: References: <87lkg23fbn.fsf@red-bean.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1178504758 4343 80.91.229.12 (7 May 2007 02:25:58 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 7 May 2007 02:25:58 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Karl Fogel Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Mon May 07 04:25:57 2007 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1HksvF-0006mq-A1 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 07 May 2007 04:25:57 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Hkt2A-0004yJ-6w for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sun, 06 May 2007 22:33:06 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1Hkt27-0004yE-Hi for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 06 May 2007 22:33:03 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1Hkt25-0004vR-U7 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 06 May 2007 22:33:03 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Hkt25-0004uk-MR for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 06 May 2007 22:33:01 -0400 Original-Received: from tomts25.bellnexxia.net ([209.226.175.188] helo=tomts25-srv.bellnexxia.net) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1Hksv9-0004Bm-Re for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 06 May 2007 22:25:52 -0400 Original-Received: from ceviche.home ([74.12.207.156]) by tomts25-srv.bellnexxia.net (InterMail vM.5.01.06.13 201-253-122-130-113-20050324) with ESMTP id <20070507022549.CUJV1521.tomts25-srv.bellnexxia.net@ceviche.home> for ; Sun, 6 May 2007 22:25:49 -0400 Original-Received: by ceviche.home (Postfix, from userid 20848) id 10BC9B411C; Sun, 6 May 2007 22:25:50 -0400 (EDT) In-Reply-To: <87lkg23fbn.fsf@red-bean.com> (Karl Fogel's message of "Sat\, 05 May 2007 18\:34\:36 -0700") User-Agent: Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/22.1.50 (gnu/linux) X-detected-kernel: Solaris 8 (1) X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:70606 Archived-At: > I've long been baffled that trunk work is affected by the fact that a > release is under way. The reason is very simple: because of a lack of resources, we can't spread half the resources working on a "new trunk" with the half working on bug-fixing on a release branch. So we first declare a freeze, then do bug-fixing on the trunk (during which time, development is significantly slowed down), and only when the amount of bug-fixing left is expected to be sufficiently low, do we finally branch so as to allow people to start hacking again without affecting negatively the time of the release. It's a delicate balancing exercise to motivate people to do bug-fixing and other release-preparation work without frustrating them away. Stefan