Re: padre maintenance
On Thu, Aug 25, 2011 at 12:22:43AM +0300, Damyan Ivanov wrote:
> -=| Dominic Hargreaves, Wed, Aug 24, 2011 at 10:11:04PM +0100 |=-
> > Currently the master branch is for a version in experimental. What
> > is the expected timescale before this branch is uploaded to unstable?
[snip discussion about stalled work]
> > If more than a few weeks, what would the preferred branch name be
> > for an unstable interim release, as far as pkg-perl is concerned (and
> > shouldn't experimental releases be in a branch other than master to
> > start with, in general?)
>
> Probably.
>
> How does it sound to branch experimental from master, revert master to
> the version in unstable and take on from there? Later, when the dust
> around APIs, Breaks and plugins has settled, we could merge
> experimental back to master.
Hmm, I might be inclined to not retroactively 'fix' the current state,
but branch from the last unstable tag to a new 'unstable' branch,
whilst master is currently being used to the experimental work. This
would make the history cleaner.
Incidentally there is an obsolete 'experimental' branch which probably
wants to be deleted.
> > The package doesn't actually appear to be team maintained (according
> > to the Maintainer field). Is this intentional? If so, is it
> > appropriate for it to be in the pkg-perl repository area?
>
> This is a remnant from the times when "application" packages were
> considered "guests" in the group. We weren't sure if these fit in the
> "module" workflow. Feel free to fix the Maintainer field (and
> Uploaders too :).
Ah, okay, that makes sense.
--
Dominic Hargreaves | http://www.larted.org.uk/~dom/
PGP key 5178E2A5 from the.earth.li (keyserver,web,email)
Reply to: