3 ms·

Last I heard (couple months ago) it was used for a couple or three pieces of functionality only. Based on my experience with it (master incredibly stale, not r

• deleted 13y ago
  [deleted]
• ethomson 13y ago
  I'm sorry if you've found the development branch to be buggy - we strive for a high-level of stability there, so we'd be very pleased if you would open issues there.
  • bch 13y ago
    Hey thx for the reply! I was working closely (via IRC, email) with somebody (I forget whom) who discouraged work on master and suggested "development" -- is that still the case? The more I delved into git, the more I realized what a large delicate job it seems to be (which is a matter for a different discussion). Regardless -- apologies if I came across to harsh -- I haven't looked at it in months... will re-pull, give it another look. Good luck w/ the development!!!
    • ethomson 13y ago
      No, you did not come across as harsh, your criticism is very accurate. The master branch tracks the latest release and is stable, but unfortunately we do not release with great frequency. We work in the development branch and - while we try to keep it stable - there's not a strong guarantee that it is. Especially when there's ongoing work in an area, it may become somewhat destabilized. This is regrettable but, I hope, understandable. We should certainly be better about more frequent releases. As it is, we tend to overreach. Thanks for the feedback.