Re: [lwip-devel] devel vs stable cvs

[Jani Monoses]

> - Bug fixes are allowed in main.
> - Invasive changes, new features and bug fixes are allowed in DEVEL.

The question is when do those invasive changes reach main if only bugfixes are 
allowed?

> My preference would be for everyone just testing DEVEL :-)

Mine too, and that would mean we don;t need stable only one CVS branch :)
 
> An alternative would be increased an frequency of merging. Unidirectional
> mergers can be automated by a Unix script, as long as the target (main)

Yes this would help, I was under the impression that since merges are 
time-consuming
because you have to pick what you merge it's a PITA as you say.
OTOH if you _do not_ pick just automatically merge it's the same thing: stable 
gets a bulk of unrelated changes and has to figure out what changed when.
Whereas with one change accompanied by a heads-up explaining it if it's 
nontrivial on lwip-devel people can see what they update to. This might mean a 
slower (can it get slower :) ???) rate of commits because of peer review but 
then people would not be afraid of devel doing unexpected things.

Or we could do a poll on lwip-users asking that everybody take a minute and 
answer what
he/she uses: latest release, CVS -stable, or CVS-devel? I have a feeling that 
devel has around 5 users :)

Jani