(cc grass5)
On Thu, Nov 25, 2004 at 09:19:51AM +0000, Paul Kelly wrote:
Hello Lorenzo
On Wed, 24 Nov 2004, Lorenzo Moretti wrote:
>After Grass 5.4.0 release I have download the new cvs version
>(grass53src_cvs_snapshot_exp_2004_11_20.tar.gz) but I have seen that this
>version is like old 5.3 with static libraries for OS X not like 5.4.0 with
>shared libs.
Yes some of the changes on the 5.4 branch could/should be backported into
the CVS HEAD. But there is not much point in using the CVS HEAD as new
development has now been moved to 5.7.
Paul, others
better to disable the CVS snapshot cronjobs for pre-5.7 code?
Markus
On Fri, 26 Nov 2004, Markus Neteler wrote:
Yes some of the changes on the 5.4 branch could/should be backported into
the CVS HEAD. But there is not much point in using the CVS HEAD as new
development has now been moved to 5.7.
Paul, others
better to disable the CVS snapshot cronjobs for pre-5.7 code?
Yes, I think so. They were useful when it was a moving target and there had been no official releases for a long time but now that there will be no new features, it is probably confusing to potential users to have it there.
Paul
On Fri, Nov 26, 2004 at 02:31:03PM +0000, Paul Kelly wrote:
On Fri, 26 Nov 2004, Markus Neteler wrote:
>>Yes some of the changes on the 5.4 branch could/should be backported into
>>the CVS HEAD. But there is not much point in using the CVS HEAD as new
>>development has now been moved to 5.7.
>
>Paul, others
>
>better to disable the CVS snapshot cronjobs for pre-5.7 code?
>
Yes, I think so. They were useful when it was a moving target and there
had been no official releases for a long time but now that there will be
no new features, it is probably confusing to potential users to have it
there.
Agreed. I have removed them and also simplified the download page.
Markus
On Fri, Nov 26, 2004 at 03:26:22PM +0100, Markus Neteler wrote:
On Thu, Nov 25, 2004 at 09:19:51AM +0000, Paul Kelly wrote:
> On Wed, 24 Nov 2004, Lorenzo Moretti wrote:
>
> >After Grass 5.4.0 release I have download the new cvs version
> >(grass53src_cvs_snapshot_exp_2004_11_20.tar.gz) but I have seen that this
> >version is like old 5.3 with static libraries for OS X not like 5.4.0 with
> >shared libs.
>
> Yes some of the changes on the 5.4 branch could/should be backported into
> the CVS HEAD. But there is not much point in using the CVS HEAD as new
> development has now been moved to 5.7.
better to disable the CVS snapshot cronjobs for pre-5.7 code?
Why? If there is a 5.4.x CVS with bug fixes (like there should be)
then snapshots would make sense.
On Sat, Nov 27, 2004 at 07:35:25PM +0100, Bernhard Reiter wrote:
On Fri, Nov 26, 2004 at 03:26:22PM +0100, Markus Neteler wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 25, 2004 at 09:19:51AM +0000, Paul Kelly wrote:
> > On Wed, 24 Nov 2004, Lorenzo Moretti wrote:
> >
> > >After Grass 5.4.0 release I have download the new cvs version
> > >(grass53src_cvs_snapshot_exp_2004_11_20.tar.gz) but I have seen that this
> > >version is like old 5.3 with static libraries for OS X not like 5.4.0 with
> > >shared libs.
> >
> > Yes some of the changes on the 5.4 branch could/should be backported into
> > the CVS HEAD. But there is not much point in using the CVS HEAD as new
> > development has now been moved to 5.7.
> better to disable the CVS snapshot cronjobs for pre-5.7 code?
Why? If there is a 5.4.x CVS with bug fixes (like there should be)
then snapshots would make sense.
Currently the 5.4.0 release contains fixes which are not present
in CVS HEAD (5.3/5.5).
Or do you mean a 5.4.x-release-branch CVS snapshot?
Markus
On Sun, Nov 28, 2004 at 04:09:57PM +0100, Markus Neteler wrote:
On Sat, Nov 27, 2004 at 07:35:25PM +0100, Bernhard Reiter wrote:
> Why? If there is a 5.4.x CVS with bug fixes (like there should be)
> then snapshots would make sense.
Currently the 5.4.0 release contains fixes which are not present
in CVS HEAD (5.3/5.5).
Or do you mean a 5.4.x-release-branch CVS snapshot?
Yes, this is what I would call the 5.4.x branch.
Of course is makes sense to have the fixes in the 5.5 branch, too
if this is going to continue its life.
I hope that 5.7.x will take over, though. 