"Lex Spoon" <lex at cc.gatech.edu> wrote:
> Bruce ONeel <beoneel at bluewin.ch> wrote:
> > Hi,
> > 
> > I think it would be very important to have Ian on board if
> > his Unix Vm is not going to be the primary one since he
> > did the origional port.  It also would be good if the
> > SF VM came as a tar file and easily built on
> > many systems, not just linux.
> > 
> > Beyond that I don't have a strong feeling.   The nicest
> > possible solution would be for the two efforts to marry :-) 
> > 
> 
> Absolutely.  But how?  There seems to be a fundamental rift between
> individual maintenance and group maintenance.  Ian's version can undergo
> major design changes without requiring the bickering that would normally
> happen among the SF group.  On the other hand, many routine patches on
> SF have gone for years without being integrated into Ian's version.

Just a silly question - why not use branches? Ian could act as a "Linus"
for the new development on the trunk and also be responsible for tagged
"official" Unix releases. Then you normally create a release branch on
that forbugfixing on that particular release - that branch would also of
course be moderated through Ian.

Then we could easily have an "experimental" branch on that release too
where you (Lex) and others can add nifty fixes and other stuff and later
on Ian can merge those changes (which he approves of) back down into the
trunk for the next release.

regards, Göran