[GRASS-dev] too many branches

Glynn Clements glynn at gclements.plus.com
Thu Aug 23 16:10:12 PDT 2012

Hamish wrote:

> > My ;-) was kind of a teaser. I regard 6.4.svn as more stable than
> > 6.4.2.
> I don't think it matters much, but for the purposes better discussion
> I think it's worth pointing out that I am perhaps using a slightly
> different definition of "stable" than you. To me, "stable" includes
> well tested, bugs (and perhaps work arounds) are known. Untested code
> with bug fixes applied is to me less stable, and I would not give it to
> a new user or use in a production environment since it hasn't been through
> the same QA labors. That's not to say that either definition is better
> than the other, or others should make recommendations following my thoughts
> on the matter, just the definition from the POV I'm looking at it from.

The terms "stable" and "unstable" normally refer to the likely extent
of any future changes. Any fixed release is perfectly "stable",
regardless of the quality of that release. A particular branch might
be of better quality, but a branch can never be as stable as a

Glynn Clements <glynn at gclements.plus.com>

More information about the grass-dev mailing list