| | 1 | = Development process = |
| | 2 | |
| | 3 | * Background |
| | 4 | * The first phase of the development process (work done in "testing") is handled properly |
| | 5 | * The last phase of the development process, official releases, are handled by James, but the process / requirements for a release are not documented |
| | 6 | * Right now "testing" is effectively a fork of James' "stable" SVN tree |
| | 7 | * There is no roadmap for next 2.x release |
| | 8 | |
| | 9 | * Making releases |
| | 10 | * Option 1: Basing releases on James' "stable" tree |
| | 11 | * There's no process to move code from "testing" (git) to "stable" (svn) |
| | 12 | * The release process is not documented |
| | 13 | * Option 2: Basing releases on David's "testing" tree |
| | 14 | * Currently James makes his modifications to his SVN tree and David pulls his changes to "testing". In this regard, James' SVN tree is no different from any other external tree |
| | 15 | * Only David's "allmerged" branch contains all code (James', external trees, etc.) |
| | 16 | * The "testing" tree should get widest testing, especially after we start releasing testing snapshots and linking to them from openvpn.net |
| | 17 | * Would it make most sense to base releases on David's "testing" tree? |
