Re: [Bitcoin-development] 0.4.x stable branch

["Luke-Jr" <luke@dashjr.org>]

On Monday, September 19, 2011 8:49:08 AM Gavin Andresen wrote:
> On Sun, Sep 18, 2011 at 7:30 PM, Luke-Jr <luke@dashjr.org> wrote:
> > If we prepare the git repository + tags, would you guys be
> > willing to make the actual release builds + source, and/or post such on
> > the websites you administrate?
> > Luke and various others in #bitcoin-stable
> 
> My initial reaction is no. Testing and bug-fixing is the bottleneck
> for making core bitcoin better, and maintaining two release lines
> won't make that better.
> 
> I also think that until we get to a "1.0" that we can all agree is
> ready for everybody AND their grandma to use, using the word "stable"
> would be dishonest.

The problem with the current development model is that bugfixes are done 
alongside improvements, and code changes *always* have the potential to 
introduce new bugs, no matter how careful anyone is. So to stay on top of 
bugfixes right now implies risking new bugs being introduced. What good is 
getting one bug fixed, if it comes with 20 new yet-to-be-discovered bugs?

For example, 0.3.20.2 was the last version if bitcoind before people started 
experiencing random (albeit rare) deadlocks. However, there have been many 
bugfixes since then. Since there is no stable branch, someone who wishes to 
get those bugfixes is forced to either create their own stable branch from 
scratch, or risk getting all the new bugs introduced in the latest version 
(most of which are unknown at this time).

On the other hand, a stable 0.4.x branch can provide people with upgrades 
which they know make only the minimal changes required to fix bugs with a much 
smaller risk of new bugs being introduced (not only are there fewer changes, 
but bugfixes tend to also be less invasive changes). While there are arguably 
still various "must-have" features missing from 0.4, having a stable branch 
also allows people to maintain a stable+<feature I need> branch with greater 
ease too.