<p dir="ltr">No Fabio, the intepreter vm is on the 'old trunk' branch, master is identical to cog at the time of import (or maybe two commits later) </p>
<div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">Am 01.08.2016 16:16 schrieb "Ben Coman" <<a href="mailto:btc@openinworld.com">btc@openinworld.com</a>>:<br type="attribution"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><br>
The workflow I referred to *does* merge into master, but only after<br>
actual Release, not before. It allows bleeding edge to proceed on the<br>
Cog branch while have a stable reference point while organising the<br>
Release. This seems useful, but I've not had a chance to use that<br>
workflow myself, so I'll say no more on it :)<br>
<br>
cheers -ben<br>
<br>
On Mon, Aug 1, 2016 at 8:22 PM, Fabio Niephaus <<a href="mailto:lists@fniephaus.com">lists@fniephaus.com</a>> wrote:<br>
><br>
> AFAIR we wanted to merge the Cog branch into master and then tag the master for a new release. The main question I guess is: when is the right moment to do this? IIRC Eliot has used his gut feeling in the past for declaring a specific version as stable. So I'd say it's up to him to decide when the first stable release on GitHub is ready.<br>
><br>
> Cheers,<br>
> Fabio<br>
><br>
> --<br>
><br>
> On Sun, Jul 31, 2016 at 1:17 PM Ben Coman <<a href="mailto:btc@openinworld.com">btc@openinworld.com</a>> wrote:<br>
>><br>
>><br>
>> On Sun, Jul 31, 2016 at 2:42 PM, marcel.taeumel <<a href="mailto:Marcel.Taeumel@hpi.de">Marcel.Taeumel@hpi.de</a>> wrote:<br>
>> ><br>
>> > Hi, there.<br>
>> ><br>
>> > Could some please tag some VM version as "stable" so that we have the first<br>
>> > candidate to be used in the Squeak release artifact packaging process? :-) I<br>
>> > don't want to package any latest "bleeding edge" VM build into those<br>
>> > artifacts.<br>
>> ><br>
>> > Thanks,<br>
>> > Marcel<br>
>><br>
>> Would there be a benefit in a release workflow like suggested under<br>
>> the heading "Release branches" [1] ? (where their 'develop' branch<br>
>> is effectively our 'Cog' branch)<br>
>><br>
>> [1] <a href="http://nvie.com/posts/a-successful-git-branching-model/" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://nvie.com/posts/a-successful-git-branching-model/</a><br>
>><br>
>> cheers -ben<br>
><br>
><br>
</blockquote></div></div>