[CF-Devel] Attitudes, egos, branches and stability of a server

[Mark Wedel]

 More than once, the debate/question of branching CVS has come up, and whether
the CVS repository should be a 'stable' release or not.  I think we had this
discussion just a couple months ago.

 The general consensus seems to be that it is not worth the effort/hassle of
doing branches.

 My personal thought is that if we do start doing branches, it probably makes
more sense to make a 'stable' branch, instead of branching for each feature. 
The main reasons for this are:

1) Most bugfixes tend to make small changes to the code, so tend to be easier to
backport from the main branch.
2) Because the changes are small, much less likely to have conflicts.
3) the main CVS branch really is the latest and bugiest, which is probably what
it should be.

 I don't know the issues behind the java editor.  but IMO, AV pretty much
followed proper protocol on this checkin: He discussed it ahead of time, made
changes to fix some peoples issue with the code, and then checked it in.  Maybe
the discussion time wasn't really long, but at the same time, the amount of code
isn't tremendous.

 Since it has been agreed that CVS is for latest and greatest, people running
CVS know their is risk of new bugs.  That is nothing new - in any case, AV would
have had to put this code into CVS at some point - realistically, that is the
only way to really work out the bugs and potential balance issues.