r18015 - gnucash/branches - Create 2.4 branch

Phil Longstaff plongstaff at rogers.com
Sun Apr 5 18:15:20 EDT 2009

I was using the development model that anything could go into trunk but not necessarily into 2.3.x, so I created the branch to separate the targeted 2.3.x development from the more general trunk development.


From: Derek Atkins <warlord at MIT.EDU>
To: Christian Stimming <stimming at tuhh.de>
Cc: gnucash-devel at gnucash.org
Sent: Sunday, April 5, 2009 4:27:59 PM
Subject: Re: r18015 - gnucash/branches - Create 2.4 branch


Quoting Christian Stimming <stimming at tuhh.de>:

> Am Sonntag, 5. April 2009 01:45 schrieb Phil Longstaff:
>> Author: plongstaff
>> Date: 2009-04-04 19:45:29 -0400 (Sat, 04 Apr 2009)
>> New Revision: 18015
>> Trac: http://svn.gnucash.org/trac/changeset/18015
>> Added:
>>    gnucash/branches/2.4/
>> Log:
>> Create 2.4 branch
> Err... this 2.4 branch is copied from trunk r18014, but you've already done
> further work on trunk which most probably should also be applied to any 2.4
> branch there will be. Does this mean the 2.4 creation was prematurely? This
> is fine and it's okay to delete it for now and re-create (copy) later. Or did
> I miss some specific planning which was the reason to decide that trunk
> r18014 was a particularly good code state to start a 2.4 branch?
> IMHO if we indeed plan for a 2.4 release cycle in the near future, the
> branching from trunk to 2.4-branch will occur very shortly before the first
> release candidate (maybe numbered 2.3.x) will be released, but not earlier
> than that. To my knowledge, there isn't such an experimental 2.3.0 release
> planned in the near future, or is there?
> I'm asking because once there is indeed a 2.4 branch, I will have to take care
> to copy over all 2.2 (stable branch) translations on the new 2.4 stable
> branch. The trunk translations are (intentionally) much much older than the
> 2.2 translations, so starting a new stable branch will trigger some noticable
> overhead work on the translation side which needs to be done. It's fine with
> me to do this, but I need some clear communication about what is going to
> happen with the 2.4 branch.

Yes, this branch is WAY premature..  WAY WAY WAAAAYYY premature.

We need to have a series of 2.3.x releases off of trunk first and
then only cut 2.4 AFTER 2.4.0 (or maybe even after 2.4.1 or 2.4.2) once
we think there's enough "to be committed" work that would require
branching off.

> Regards,
> Christian


--       Derek Atkins, SB '93 MIT EE, SM '95 MIT Media Laboratory
      Member, MIT Student Information Processing Board  (SIPB)
      URL: http://web.mit.edu/warlord/    PP-ASEL-IA     N1NWH
      warlord at MIT.EDU                        PGP key available

gnucash-devel mailing list
gnucash-devel at gnucash.org

More information about the gnucash-devel mailing list