branch discussions?

jeremy at jeremy at
Mon May 3 22:15:24 PDT 2004

> DJ Lucas wrote:
>> 6.1 devel obviously happens on hackers ATM.  Where is the home for 6.0?
>>  I'd suggest hacker's untill 5.1 has reached release, but that doesn't
>> really fit either.  Idealy, dev houses maintenace and current branch in
>> the future, but thought it important to ask now for clarification.
> I think it's pretty reasonable to discuss 6.0 issues on lfs-hackers; as
> far as those of us that were messing with BE-LFS are concerned, 6.0 is
> in "feature freeze" anyway, just waiting for 5.1 to get released, 6.0 to
> get wider testing, etc. before it gets released itself. I doubt there
> will be a lot of discussion other than for the very new stuff (like udev).

I agree.  Until 5.1 is released, the 6.0 branch is still to be considered
"unstable", despite the fact that it's probably been more heavily used
than the 5.1 stuff :)

Honestly, 6.0 is minor stuff, for the most part.  If not for the switch to
2.6/nptl/udev, I would say it would be more 5.2 than 6.0.

Guys, I know things are going fast, but that's just because of the
stagnation of the project over the last few months - a lot of stuff was
just waiting for the go-ahead.  Once we get thru the next few weeks,
things will stablize out.

Also, to the rest of the people on -dev:  Remember this is a historic
moment - the first LFS release not managed by Gerard.  Myself and Matthew
are very much playing this one by ear - a BIG thank you goes out to Kevin
Fleming who spent hours with us today helping us work out the issues with
CVS (killing off the old 5_1 branch, creating a new one with newxml, and
so on), and to Zack for all his work in integrating the work we had done
in BE-LFS so quickly.

I think the current plan is 5.1 by mid-May, then 6.0 pretty close behind that point things will have stabilized out.


More information about the lfs-dev mailing list