On Sep 13, 2012, at 09:18 , Markus Klotzbuecher wrote:

> On Thu, Sep 13, 2012 at 12:01:40AM +0200, Peter Soetens wrote:
>> Hi Charles,
>>
>> On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 9:06 AM, Charles Lesire-Cabaniols
>> <charles [dot] lesire [..] ...> wrote:
>>> Hi devs,
>>>
>>> I have two versions of the Orocos toolchain coexisting on my platform, each
>>> one managed by autoproj.
>>> I am facing compilation issues with OCL in master, and looking at the
>>> commits on the gitorious page of OCL, I found that a lot of patches were
>>> only applied to toolchain-2.5.
>>>
>>> For instance, the following commit
>>> http://gitorious.org/orocos-toolchain/ocl/commit/5794613614a8e585ff4fef3...
>>> fixing some missing namespaces, that partially solves my errors (still some
>>> missing in 'print').
>>>
>>> Is there any good reason to have patches applied only to toolchain-2.5?
>>> Is master a living branch, or is it there only to save patches to apply to
>>> toolchain-2.5?
>>
>> We merge toolchain-2.5 on an unpredictable time basis to master :-]
>> Which means that master is sometimes behind toolchain-2.5 for
>> bugfixes, since the stable branch gets the fixes first. Looking at
>> OCL, it seems the master merge never happened after the release, so I
>> just merged and pushed it.
>
> I understand why you do it, but having a essentially useless master
> branch is very unintutive, since people tend to expect a stable
> version there.

+1

It has never made sense to me ... :-( ... not sure what I'm missing.
S