[Sparkle] Stable Sparkle branch?

[Stuart Morgan]

On Tue, Mar 4, 2008 at 8:44 PM, Andy Matuschak <andy at andymatuschak.org> wrote:
> (note to self: I should discourage people from using 1.1 anymore...)

(Splitting this off, so as not to hijack the original thread...)

>From my perspective as a Sparkle client, cutting a new stable branch
would be the best way to do that. One of the biggest things going for
Sparkle is that since a number of apps use it, there is an expectation
that it has gotten a significant amount of real-world testing. Having
to just pick a revision number from head and hope that it's stable,
without having any idea at all of whether or not it's had any
real-world use, negates a lot of that.

A stable branch would also be very useful for getting current Sparkle
clients to stay up-to-date; I'd love to update the trunk snapshot we
took for Camino, but the small bugfixes are are mixed in with
destabilizing changes (this isn't just idle fear; the commit log for
trunk makes it clear that there have been a number of big changes, and
several regressions at various points), which means that we have to
accept (or backport the fixes for) a number of known bugs, because we
can't accept the risk of major changes at this point in our schedule.
A stable branch with just the small, tightly-focused bugfixes would be
a huge help.

-Stuart