X-Authentication-Warning: delorie.com: mail set sender to geda-user-bounces using -f
X-Recipient: geda-user AT delorie DOT com
X-Original-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
        d=gmail.com; s=20120113;
        h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to
         :content-type;
        bh=GDAi9Joa8dnswqJud2UoptbdpJQRPmd0WdK24NDE07U=;
        b=GdejPim++4epA70DgBmCfGcYK28uVc60IxEqDcwd60zd+iDiSkXMUV+oJogfAMrCeU
         uyJfV4s5OF92GnZUX8HSmyJ1qf1bEPmFoSNhSGjm0wTy8gmN9CLawOcV1D0xABr6Nzkb
         qiKK0YELwz3ab6lHfAKW7k2bqjv8rBouXVT5kYue+MloErbNd2ZnVoWZhKop3YTYRgOQ
         Cp6cP8z8jTr4+Ad6jq89VX9fgVlZwjKtu6p5c7DZrQa9iVm3Ist2+nPDYb4mIJ2BF3PI
         SB6KryIw0frYtVMHCy2id+HJztbleYW4XXnTpToOx5xQzg8Ae7Fh+KmirCqybcnEsTvp
         vpjQ==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
        d=1e100.net; s=20130820;
        h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date
         :message-id:subject:from:to:content-type;
        bh=GDAi9Joa8dnswqJud2UoptbdpJQRPmd0WdK24NDE07U=;
        b=QMKJHZmBbLAUy8aM+NDPrOFOzgwLyqtPVBtw+Kbs9HKUeGLFsxs2m8j/cl5jX+DzPK
         OdeOO1hWbt/NCdLtrZtxErkj4YLyD4uBNMfiXl0wqOTkFegrCvBxI6ywWV0TIs9gIgLp
         R+CJ+i6XF9KO6+mWANruKpLv3ZHlhap003ArcC2AAFd9NXayzNKKCqu37NLAnRKLdtzm
         sXRi8vVZrqqOjo9FbCTt7xd2y/uV81W28EwNY9qRWQsaR3rWkFAjoiNK1LSYli2Zrwt1
         vGLBbU2UfzBG3Q8T0nE+UBmQ8Qi0VuP7m1ipe1BIIIR6Vkb9D1TRts+Zi7DhQc+PGEDf
         c4uw==
X-Gm-Message-State: AG10YOQv/zwbf/Iz8qRddYqYfQPy0GcxPjG6ssWvpWg+4bJypCC/9kTjPXi2HSYC6ejvlRXZb2YcxZSD/89YFQ==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.194.19.164 with SMTP id g4mr8646126wje.120.1454597785375;
 Thu, 04 Feb 2016 06:56:25 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <201602032125.u13LPeJ9003049@envy.delorie.com>
References: <CAC4O8c_fPco1L6LJ0wWuh6yvWM4+XM8RdWqyO4bkmAD-Oe5Lqg AT mail DOT gmail DOT com>
	<201602032125 DOT u13LPeJ9003049 AT envy DOT delorie DOT com>
Date: Thu, 4 Feb 2016 05:56:25 -0900
Message-ID: <CAC4O8c861ppi00JgjXnvfr15xrH8XPx6sSD5XYFEHTAbJW2-tw@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [geda-user] unstable_master branch
From: "Britton Kerin (britton DOT kerin AT gmail DOT com) [via geda-user AT delorie DOT com]" <geda-user AT delorie DOT com>
To: geda-user AT delorie DOT com
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Reply-To: geda-user AT delorie DOT com
Errors-To: nobody AT delorie DOT com
X-Mailing-List: geda-user AT delorie DOT com
X-Unsubscribes-To: listserv AT delorie DOT com
Precedence: bulk

On Wed, Feb 3, 2016 at 12:25 PM, DJ Delorie <dj AT delorie DOT com> wrote:
>
>> while still maintaining master in a release-ready state.
>
> FWIW I don't agree with this part; a release branch should always be
> release-ready but I see no reason why master should be.

In that case there's less point (assuming you decide this question),
but still not no point.
For example I think Peter Clifton didn't like some of the layer
changes, but feels that since they're merged it's too late to do
anything.
Because of things like this there seems to be a lot of fear to merge
anything, which is understandable but creates some problems.  A tiered
approach might help with that.

Britton