Re: commit access policies

[Thomas Bushnell BSG]

"Alfred M\. Szmidt" <ams@gnu.org> writes:

>    If the decision is that the code in gnumach-1-branch is what we
>    should care most about using and releasing, and that this is the
>    code which should be the basis of ongoing development, then it is,
>    de facto, HEAD.  Which is what you said.
>
> Right.  And if the decision is that, then the bug-fix-only rule _is_
> lifted for the code in gnumach-1-branch.

The "code in the gnumach-1-branch" is nearly identical to the "code in
the HEAD branch".  What distinguishes them is the labels we put on
them, and small differences in the code.

> I don't see the whole fuss about adding features to gnumach-1-branch,
> oskit-branch got features added while gnumach-1-branch was HEAD.  

Perhaps you don't understand what the branch was created for.  Maybe
you should ask before launching off and declaring how the world should
be rearranged.

> The only really good reason for swapping branches is that the code
> in right now HEAD is b0rked, not that gnumach-1-branch is the most
> cared about.

So fix the code in HEAD.