> Xavier, don't you think it would be a good time for going with a dual cvs
> branch scheme or something like that, where you have a released branch
> (3.05, and bugfix releases : 3.05.1, 3.05.2, etc) and a development
> branch (which will become 3.06).

The need for this isn't apparent yet: we haven't yet encountered a
situation where a show-stopper bug appears, but the main CVS branch is
far from a releasable state.  One reason for this is that major
evolutions of the system, e.g. polymorphic methods or dynamic loading
of C libraries, are carried on separate branches, and merged back only
when they are in a usable state.  

> In this case, will you revert all your changes and reapply after having
> released the bugfix version, hurry the developpment so you can ship the
> new version fixing the bug, or just let the bug stay until the next
> version is released ?

If that happens, we'll do what works best, and that might very well be
a bugfix branch.  But, frankly, this is our internal "cuisine", and I
don't see why you and other users should care.

- Xavier Leroy
-------------------
To unsubscribe, mail caml-list-request@inria.fr Archives: http://caml.inria.fr
Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs FAQ: http://caml.inria.fr/FAQ/
Beginner's list: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ocaml_beginners