[Freeciv-Dev] Re: Managing Long-Term Changes

[Raimar Falke <hawk@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Sat, Dec 22, 2001 at 11:23:06AM +0100, Petr Baudis wrote:
> Dear diary, on Sat, Dec 22, 2001 at 09:23:54AM CET, I got a letter, where
> Raimar Falke <hawk@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> told me, that...
> > On Fri, Dec 21, 2001 at 09:15:41PM +0000, Gregory Berkolaiko wrote:
> > >  --- Petr Baudis <pasky@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: 
> > > > > use GI too.  But (b)...
> > > > In fact (a) actually exists. It's on pasky.ji.cz, /home/cvs/aiciv, 
> > > > module
> > > > freeciv-a2 ;). Cvsweb access at
> > > > http://pasky.ji.cz/cvsweb.cgi/freeciv-a2/?cvsroot=aiciv. 
> > > 
> > > I know.  So the problem here is (b).  When and under which circumstances
> > > can we/you hope for merger of you and stable branches?  It's a question to
> > > maintainers really, not to you...  And before I get a clear answer to this
> > > question, I don't really want to invest any effort into it :(
> > 
> > I can't comment because I don't know what is in the tree. If you submit
> > changes please seperate them. By type (comment cleanup, variable renaming,
> > real code changes,...) is preferred but by file is also ok.
> Only PR#1149 is there for now. I decided to go much slower way and don't
> forerun official CVS a lot. At least until there will be any real chance to
> cleanup AI in official CVS as well :).
> 
> If someone will join me, I expect him to make separate things in separate
> branches, so we will be still able to make small and specialized patches 
> easily
> in order to merge them to official CVS.
> 
> This is not a takeover attempt! :-) I just want to have for myself (and offer
> to others interested) more development CVS of same project (like even Raimar
> suggested ;), which should just help to test more development
> not-yet-ready-to-super-stable-CVS patches together and have some version
> control even on them. I expect to have this CVS in tight sync with official 
> CVS
> and generally only short-term changes there (until they will be tuned and
> accepted).

This is ok. As long as you don't forget to submit patches of changes
when they have stabilized. This is IMHO the error Ross made.

        Raimar

-- 
 email: rf13@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
 "I heard if you play the NT-4.0-CD backwards, you get a satanic message."
 "That's nothing, if you play it forward, it installs NT-4.0"