Sender:	rich AT phekda DOT freeserve DOT co DOT uk
Message-ID:	<3DAC3EDF.345B2795@phekda.freeserve.co.uk>
Date:	Tue, 15 Oct 2002 17:14:23 +0100
From:	Richard Dawe <rich AT phekda DOT freeserve DOT co DOT uk>
X-Mailer:	Mozilla 4.77 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.19 i586)
X-Accept-Language:	de,fr
MIME-Version:	1.0
To:	djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
Subject:	Re: 2.03 vs 3.2
References:	<10210141948 DOT AA19018 AT clio DOT rice DOT edu>
	<30240030515 DOT 20021015122801 AT softhome DOT net>
	<3DAC116D DOT 8DF6BDF7 AT phekda DOT freeserve DOT co DOT uk> <162253722523 DOT 20021015161613 AT softhome DOT net>
Reply-To:	djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com

Helo.

Laurynas Biveinis wrote:
[snip]
> We're talking about slightly different things there - I mean if we
> will have to go through refreshes again in future, then IMHO it will
> be easier if say, trivial bugfixes, are checked into mainline and
> release branch at once. No need to search for them anymore, if need
> arises.
[snip]

Ah, OK, sorry. I thought you were talking about merging from 'main
development' branch (e.g.: current CVS) to a 'bugfix' branch (e.g.: 2.03). So
no merging would take place. That sounds much more pleasant.

Bye, Rich =]

-- 
Richard Dawe [ http://www.phekda.freeserve.co.uk/richdawe/ ]

- Raw text -