Administrative issues for 10.10

1) A while back I proposed having 10.9 and 10.10 share a tree.  This 
would involve:

1) Putting out a fink which knows not to symlink 10.9 to 10.7
2) Generate the a tree in cvs (since it's unlikely that we're going to 
have git update going in short order)
3) Maintainers doing 10.9-related updates in that tree.

There's a fairly large divergence between 10.8 and 10.9, and from the 
relatively limited 10.10 feedback we've gotten the 10.9 - 10.10 
divergence seems smaller, so this seems like it would be less of a 
hassle for maintainers than starting a 10.10 tree.  In principle we 
could could just stay in 10.7/ , but selfupdates become a longer process.

Any strong opinions?

2) Does anybody have a strong objection to not having an upgrade path 
between 10.9 and 10.10?  They're using the same C++ standard.

-- 
Alexander Hansen, Ph.D.
Fink User Liaison
My package updates: http://finkakh.wordpress.com/

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Want fast and easy access to all the code in your enterprise? Index and
search up to 200,000 lines of code with a free copy of Black Duck
Code Sight - the same software that powers the world's largest code
search on Ohloh, the Black Duck Open Hub! Try it now.
http://p.sf.net/sfu/bds
_______________________________________________
Fink-devel mailing list
[email protected]
List archive:
http://news.gmane.org/gmane.os.apple.fink.devel
Subscription management:
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fink-devel