Re: 21.2.90 pretest, 21.3, 21.4...

[Eli Zaretskii <eliz@is.elta.co.il>]

On Tue, 5 Nov 2002, Stefan Monnier wrote:

> > > Maybe this can be achieved by making
> > > "smaller" releases, where each new release has fewer new features.
> > 
> > That requires a higher degree of control than we have now over what
> > changes are installed on the trunk.  As long as each change does not
> > need to be approved before it's installed, I think we cannot guarantee
> > that some new features are postponed.
> 
> That's not true.  We can and do declare feature freezes and we can
> impose them pretty effectively by shaming the poor soul who disobeys
> and undoing his change.

Feature freeze means there are _no_ new features until the thaw; Kai 
suggested a finer control (allow some new features, but not others).

I also have a clear impression that reverting changes is something we 
do only as the last resort (and for a number of good reasons; I don't 
suggest doing that more often!).  I don't remember a single change that 
was reverted because we thought it would destabilize the code, I think 
the few cases of chnage revrsal were all due to known bugs they caused, 
not because we were afraid of unknown bugs.