Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: today's merges

[Robert Anderson]

On Sun, 2003-08-31 at 12:12, Andrew Suffield wrote:
> On Sun, Aug 31, 2003 at 08:34:09PM +0200, Karel Gardas wrote:
> > On Sun, 31 Aug 2003, Robert Anderson wrote:
> > 
> > > On Fri, 2003-08-29 at 13:48, Andrew Suffield wrote:
> > > > I'm not going with 1.1 just yet because the 1.1pre releases tend to
> > > > have a fair few bugs, and I don't have time to sift all the patches
> > > > applying those which fix signficant issues. 1.0 is limited, but
> > > > _works_, and to the best of my knowledge has no significant issues in
> > > > the latest Debian release.
> > >
> > > I would consider "no star-merge" a significant issue.
> > >
> > 
> > Indeed! For our MICO project development no star-merge is simply
> > show-stopper. Is really 1.1 so unstable or buggy?
> 
> Not buggy, per se, just unstable in the classic sense of the word -
> it's a target that moves _really_ fast. I don't have time to chase
> it.

Then don't.  Just pick a good one, like 1.1pre5.

> You're better off running from the daily builds if you need that
> sort of stuff.

Sure, but most people don't do that, so they're left wondering how arch
solves the "repeated merge problem" like it advertises.

I went through this with a contributor to the bash completion stuff
today, in fact.

Anyway, enough nagging - but it would be nice.

Bob