| Thread Previous • Date Previous • Date Next • Thread Next |
Le 07/01/2013 15:09, Ted Gould a écrit :
On Mon, 2013-01-07 at 07:35 +0100, Didier Roche wrote:Also, that we have to do that because there is a bad history of committing to ABI and API stability, remember that normally, in every normal upstream project, such a breakage ask to change the soname, and in this case, we will know beforehand on which version of the -dev package to build-dep. We are just workarounding here bad upstream practice.The problem is that we're not talking about released versions, which certainly should manage their API/ABI with proper SO numbers etc, we're talking about development trunk. We've removed the ability to have a playground before committing to an API that developers are committing to. We can't expect merging to trunk to be a long term commitment to API or ABI stability. Doing a release is saying "this is baked" and we'll commit to it, proposing a merge is not.
Indeed, we removed a playground, but that was 2 cycles beforehand already. Starting the 11.10 release development cycle, we went to "trunk is sacred" thanks to the acceptance criteria and that's how we start raising the quality bar. This means that trunk is not a playfield anymore, but rather when something hits trunk, the quality is high enough to pass tests.
You can take whatever other branch you want, like calling it "next foo feature", then, using that one and having other people and yourself branching from it, merge into it, writing tests, experimenting with other ppas containing it. Once it's baked and ready for more people to use it, you then propose this feature branch for a full review against trunk. After having it accepted and tests passing, the feature, merged to trunk is then pushed to ubuntu.
| Thread Previous • Date Previous • Date Next • Thread Next |
