> Can we do the
>
commit-to-head-and-then-backport-trick-especially-so-close-for-releases
> next time? Just to create the fake impression that
> we do have a release
> process in place... we've seen stuff break too often
> already close for a
> release :) Ofcourse it's not that we don't trust
> your code Dom, because
> you've never broken stuff like, say, link-grammar
> :-P
No. HEAD is in such a sorry state, that it's unusable
for any of my needs. In fact, printing is so broken
that I couldn't test this code in HEAD, and know that
I didn't break printing... So long as your backport
policy is to blindly backport patches with the word
"backport" in them without any testing, I fail to see
how this pragmatically differs.
Best,
Dom
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
Received on Fri Apr 7 14:20:24 2006
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Fri Apr 07 2006 - 14:20:24 CEST