shouldn't the mere existance of a feature no matter how experimental warant it being turned on in the development branch?
Only if somebody is working actively on it, which has not been the case recently. I might agree that it would speed up fixing (or, in some cases, removal) of code that nobody cares for much today, but probably at the expense of other development.
i can understand these prerequesites for the stable branch but the devel branch is there to test new and experimental stuff and shake out bugs so code that is already in the pike tree should be activated and tested unconditionally.
The testing part mentioned is important. While testing for features not breaking the rest of Pike is not without value, it typically is more interesting that it works as intended and thus has good code coverage in the testsuite, documentation about intention, use and similar. We still fall a bit short on all those areas for vintage code in Pike, and improving the situation takes some work by some dedicated party who cares for particular features.
/ Johan Sundström (folkskådare)
Previous text:
2003-04-06 03:56: Subject: Re: pike security (was: sTeam DoS vulnerability (no longer is: Do we have a floatingpoint bug?))
On Sun, Apr 06, 2003 at 03:00:00AM +0200, Martin Stjernholm, Roxen IS @ Pike developers forum wrote:
and then turned on by default in the development branch.
shouldn't the mere existance of a feature no matter how experimental warant it being turned on in the development branch?
i can understand these prerequesites for the stable branch but the devel branch is there to test new and experimental stuff and shake out bugs so code that is already in the pike tree should be activated and tested unconditionally.
greetings, martin.
/ Brevbäraren