Sure, but what would the point be? It's no problem to remove the old development repository once it becomes the stable release and then fork a new development branch. It's just the way Pike has choosen to do things.
It is better to document this policy instead of inventing bad fixes. I think David was not aware of this practise and thus his conclusion that the repository was broken. If he had known that it's now called 7.7, he would have checked that out instead.
It might be that David is sitting on a bunch of changes that he wants to commit to the tree, but that is a different problem. To counter that, we need a procedure to feature freeze the development branch before declaring it stable.
/ Marcus Agehall (Scanian)
Previous text:
2004-04-28 17:56: Subject: CVS is broken
Cant 7.5 be an alias for 7.7?
/ Petter Larsson (slutPuttad, numer StOFil)