busybox_1_1_stable branch [was: Re: is NFS mounting borked in bb-1.1.1?]

[Bernhard Fischer]

On Mon, Mar 27, 2006 at 03:20:36PM -0500, Rob Landley wrote:

>> The busybox_1_1_stable branch would be open for fixes only. Other
>> projects have the convention that fixes for stable branches are checked
>> into trunk first (if appropriate) and tested there for a few days and
>> only then are applied to the stable branch. I think that this convention
>> makes sense.
>
>Checking in fixes to the current development line makes sense, agreed.
>
>I'll probably put up a patch with known fixes in the download directory this 
>evening.  The date stamp on that says when it's last updated, and I'll start 
>the file with a list of URLs to the downloads/patches/svn-* entry for each 
>fix.
>
>The problem with issuing more dot-releases is that right after a release 
>somebody seems to notice a new bug every 12 hours or so, most of which are 
>pretty trivial or very specific to certain people.  You shouldn't have to 
>download a new tarball three times a week for tiny fixes that probably don't 
>even apply to you.

People who care could track the stable branch while development
continues on trunk. Trunk would be a testbed, the branch would receive
fixes only.
>
>Keep in mind that I'm trying to get 1.1.2 out in June.  Do you want to branch 
>the tree _again_ in June?

No. The subject talks about a busybox_1_1_stable branch. This branch
would be used to create the stable releases for the 1.1.x.y.z series.