bzr-svn

[Stephen J. Turnbull]

Russel Winder writes:

 > Can I make a suggestion:  The version dependency should change with the
 > commit that makes the breaking change.  This way issues get flagged
 > during the development phase in a way that makes people aware before
 > there might be a problem.

You're asking the impossible.  On the one hand, you say "it works for
me, why do you break it with a version dependency?"  Now you're saying
"make sure it doesn't work for anybody, so that they'll be aware that
it might not work for others."

 > I guess I should stop using the branch and just use the released deb
 > files.

Maybe.  There are ways to use beta test code in production
environments (that is, after, the original definition of "beta"
test).  They require a certain discipline, and it's up to you whether
you want to apply that extra effort in return for access to the most
recent features and fixes (and bugs<wink>), or simply to "pay back"
the team for their effort.

 > Can I make a bit of a plea:  Can whoever is doing the 1.10 roll out make
 > sure that:
 > 
 > 	bzr
 > 	bzrtool
 > 	bzr-svn
 > 
 > all have packages in the release PPA at the same time.

They do ... if you wait long enough.  The problem with the suggestion
of coordinating them so that the releases are (nearly enough)
simultaneous is that (a) there is no "who (singular)"; I believe that
all three have different maintainers, and bzr itself doesn't even have
a consistent release engineer---the role rotates, and (b) some people
don't need all those tools, why should they wait if one of the
maintainers is on vacation or traveling?