busybox_1_1_stable branch [was: Re: is NFS mounting borked in bb-1.1.1?]

[Mike Frysinger]

On Tuesday 28 March 2006 14:03, Rob Landley wrote:
> On Tuesday 28 March 2006 1:52 am, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> > On Monday 27 March 2006 15:20, Rob Landley wrote:
> > > I'll probably put up a patch with known fixes in the download directory
> > > this evening.  The date stamp on that says when it's last updated, and
> > > I'll start the file with a list of URLs to the downloads/patches/svn-*
> > > entry for each fix.
> >
> > which is horrible for anyone using a mirror distribution system ...
> > updating files (and thus the hashes) without changing the filename causes
> > havok for these people
>
> There are mirrors of the busybox download directory?  (I know uClibc has a
> mirror on kernel.org, but Erik updates that by hand.)

i was talking about distro's that do mirroring ... people who package up 
busybox for use ... and in general, people like to be able to verify that the 
file they downloaded is correct ... changing the file without renaming it 
just doesnt cut it

> > > Keep in mind that I'm trying to get 1.1.2 out in June.  Do you want to
> > > branch the tree _again_ in June?
> >
> > as Bernhard pointed out, you do branches for X.X, not for X.X.X
>
> If it makes you feel better to create a branch I'm not going to check
> anything into or cut releases from...

i get the feeling that it's either your way or the highway

> Query: are you going to rebase the thing to 1.1.2 when that ships in June?
> Look at the new applets and rewrites that went in between 1.1.0 and 1.1.1.
> If those releases weren't bug fixes only, then either you need a new branch
> every X.X.X, or you're going to just overwrite the old branch with the new
> release point each release.  I fail to see the usefulness here.

the idea was to restrict *bugfixes only* to the branch ... adding new applets 
is *development work* and really has no place in point release fixes
-mike