Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of gmail.com
	designates 209.85.161.47 as permitted sender)
	client-ip=209.85.161.47; envelope-from=gavinandresen@gmail.com;
	helo=mail-fx0-f47.google.com; 
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <201109181930.59565.luke@dashjr.org>
References: <201109181930.59565.luke@dashjr.org>
Date: Mon, 19 Sep 2011 08:49:08 -0400
Message-ID: <CABsx9T2FBNv26E4LHmi9GVfi1HLR1wR__qGp1_gjco8rwN0L4Q@mail.gmail.com>
From: Gavin Andresen <gavinandresen@gmail.com>
To: Luke-Jr <luke@dashjr.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Cc: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] 0.4.x stable branch
Precedence: list

On Sun, Sep 18, 2011 at 7:30 PM, Luke-Jr <luke@dashjr.org> wrote:
> If we prepare the git repository + tags, would you guys be
> willing to make the actual release builds + source, and/or post such on the
> websites you administrate?
> Luke and various others in #bitcoin-stable

My initial reaction is no. Testing and bug-fixing is the bottleneck
for making core bitcoin better, and maintaining two release lines
won't make that better.

I also think that until we get to a "1.0" that we can all agree is
ready for everybody AND their grandma to use, using the word "stable"
would be dishonest.

Would we link to your binaries if you want to create 0.4.* releases,
build binaries, then QA test and release them?

I dunno-- what do other people think?

Eventually, when there are a bunch of bitcoin implementations to
choose from, I think bitcoin.org should look like bittorrent.org -- it
should become a forum for developers to exchange ideas about the
direction of bitcoin.

-- 
--
Gavin Andresen