diff options
| author | Alex Waters <ampedal@gmail.com> | 2011-09-21 10:24:25 -0400 |
|---|---|---|
| committer | bitcoindev <bitcoindev@gnusha.org> | 2011-09-21 14:24:32 +0000 |
| commit | 02db42b2be22cff5e27db5872f4cb3015eae8505 (patch) | |
| tree | 01fbad752fda37a8dde5de4876e716c6a2423a00 | |
| parent | 776dba8ddbc2a98989f5c8a0d644af191cb69bd9 (diff) | |
| download | pi-bitcoindev-02db42b2be22cff5e27db5872f4cb3015eae8505.tar.gz pi-bitcoindev-02db42b2be22cff5e27db5872f4cb3015eae8505.zip | |
Re: [Bitcoin-development] 0.4.x stable branch
| -rw-r--r-- | e5/1702e81b0abb2e45cb5be1a0a7d99d1fa614f3 | 82 |
1 files changed, 82 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/e5/1702e81b0abb2e45cb5be1a0a7d99d1fa614f3 b/e5/1702e81b0abb2e45cb5be1a0a7d99d1fa614f3 new file mode 100644 index 000000000..488055a93 --- /dev/null +++ b/e5/1702e81b0abb2e45cb5be1a0a7d99d1fa614f3 @@ -0,0 +1,82 @@ +Received: from sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.192] + helo=mx.sourceforge.net) + by sfs-ml-1.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76) + (envelope-from <ampedal@gmail.com>) id 1R6Niy-0001Vw-5R + for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; + Wed, 21 Sep 2011 14:24:32 +0000 +Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of gmail.com + designates 209.85.216.182 as permitted sender) + client-ip=209.85.216.182; envelope-from=ampedal@gmail.com; + helo=mail-qy0-f182.google.com; +Received: from mail-qy0-f182.google.com ([209.85.216.182]) + by sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) + (Exim 4.76) id 1R6Nix-00037u-Hx + for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; + Wed, 21 Sep 2011 14:24:32 +0000 +Received: by qyk4 with SMTP id 4so1894345qyk.13 + for <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>; + Wed, 21 Sep 2011 07:24:26 -0700 (PDT) +MIME-Version: 1.0 +Received: by 10.229.68.84 with SMTP id u20mr612363qci.288.1316615066125; Wed, + 21 Sep 2011 07:24:26 -0700 (PDT) +Received: by 10.229.227.137 with HTTP; Wed, 21 Sep 2011 07:24:25 -0700 (PDT) +In-Reply-To: <201109201637.52006.luke@dashjr.org> +References: <201109181930.59565.luke@dashjr.org> + <CA+8xBpd9wBGLBnfXr=OiLYxVPvxegoi+eMqHFqpQRoaVW1uvKw@mail.gmail.com> + <201109201637.52006.luke@dashjr.org> +Date: Wed, 21 Sep 2011 10:24:25 -0400 +Message-ID: <CAL0fb63P9CLEi3dRumYJzj2jSAggULzei8THW6wYJJ5ZpGmcXA@mail.gmail.com> +From: Alex Waters <ampedal@gmail.com> +To: Luke-Jr <luke@dashjr.org> +Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 +X-Spam-Score: -1.4 (-) +X-Spam-Report: Spam Filtering performed by mx.sourceforge.net. + See http://spamassassin.org/tag/ for more details. + -1.5 SPF_CHECK_PASS SPF reports sender host as permitted sender for + sender-domain + 0.0 FREEMAIL_FROM Sender email is commonly abused enduser mail provider + (ampedal[at]gmail.com) + -0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record + -0.1 DKIM_VALID_AU Message has a valid DKIM or DK signature from + author's domain + 0.1 DKIM_SIGNED Message has a DKIM or DK signature, + not necessarily valid + -0.1 DKIM_VALID Message has at least one valid DKIM or DK signature + 0.2 AWL AWL: From: address is in the auto white-list +X-Headers-End: 1R6Nix-00037u-Hx +Cc: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net +Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] 0.4.x stable branch +X-BeenThere: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net +X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 +Precedence: list +List-Id: <bitcoin-development.lists.sourceforge.net> +List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development>, + <mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=unsubscribe> +List-Archive: <http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/forum.php?forum_name=bitcoin-development> +List-Post: <mailto:bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net> +List-Help: <mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=help> +List-Subscribe: <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development>, + <mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=subscribe> +X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 21 Sep 2011 14:24:32 -0000 + +I think what Jeff has said is ideal for a stable 1.0 or 1.1 release of +a kernal. I also think it's absolutely the direction we should be +heading in, but not this afternoon. The desire to keep a 0.4.x stable +branch is a symptom of a bigger QA problem, one that I am attempting +to address in general. + +Gavin has reminded me to test, test, test. I implore anyone who clicks +the pull button to not only test their code, but write down how they +tested it. The issue tracker is somewhat out of control, and my +opinion is that a stable branch is not going to fix it. + +This stage of development can be agitating, as you implement code in +the wild - it is outpaced or broken easily. The sooner we can get a +robust QA process to hammer out bugs, and process pulls - the closer +we are to a stable 1.0 release. + +Please contact me if you would like to help contribute to the bug +hammering - I promise that we can find ways to make it +interesting/challenging. (working on a zapper too!) + + |