Re: [Axiom-developer] RE: gcl-2.6.8pre on MAC OSX 10.2

[Ralf Hemmecke]

On 11/03/2006 10:22 PM, Gabriel Dos Reis wrote:
> Ralf Hemmecke <address@hidden> writes:
>
> | > I'm very happy to see Tim is making changes more visible now, than waiting
> | > for ages before seeing light. The main reason I originally volunteered to
> | > maintain Silver is that I do believe in "live sources". Tim suggested
> | > at the time that he did not have time do maintain too many branches.
> | > It therefore was a natural thing for me to volunteer to take on the
> | > job.  Now, if Tim has more time to do the job, I'm all for it.
> | 
> | > However, I see practical issue here:    (1) first, we should not
> | > have one single person as authority to
> | >       commit changes.
> | 
> | We are speaking here _only_ of the changes that go to the next Gold
> | release.
>
> we are talking of Silver, right?

Right. Gold=axiom--main--1 only gets patches every two months.
The gold-to-be=axiom--silver--1 is the branch that Tim commits to in 
order to prepare the next gold.

In my understanding we requested that in order to let axiom-developers 
see how the current gold gradually develops into the next gold. We all 
agreed that Tim commits to gold. Since now that thing is called 
axiom--silver--1 does not change that.

axiom--silver--1 is mirrored on sourceforge /silver and is where people 
should branch from (which is currently not done because /trunk and 
/silver exist simultaneously).

Up to now silver in the form of axiom--silver--1 is maintained by Tim to 
assure quality for the next gold release.

build-improvements has been branched from (a not so perfect copy of) 
silver (which was actually gold=axiom--main--1--patch-49 at that time, 
if I remember correctly).

I haven't yet completely understood how Gaby wants the development 
process. Gaby certainly has quite a lot of experience with development 
on gcc. So we all would be happy to learn.

Gaby, could you post how you think Axiom development should work? (You 
should probably avoid the usage of Gold/silver/bronze.) Just post your 
dream. Where should be the main source? How many stages should be there 
before something is released? How is quality ensured? What _roles_ (not 
persons) should be responsible for what.

Actually, I should ask the same from Tim, but I have the impression I 
somehow already understand his model.

Only if we have a clear picture what the options are, we can discuss how 
we clear the current confusion or how we agree on another development model.

I found the discussion up to now not very fruitful. To me it seemed that 
it is still not clear what Silver actually is. I also have the 
impression that Gaby wanted something else when he opted to maintain 
Silver. Names can sometimes be misleading and I think this is now what 
we have. Tim-Silver is not the intention of Gaby-Silver.

So please Gaby, try to make clear what you like even if you have already 
said that several times before. We must somehow settle the problem that 
you and Tim obviously have different understanding of "Silver".

Ralf