Ross Paterson wrote:

I agree completely, but I was wistfully hoping that we could do a release even sooner. (It will be a bit of a re-org, killing options.h as well.)

Rest assured: I don't want to do this re-org before the release, just some other minor cleanups... :-) Cheers, S.

Alastair Reid wrote:

Would it be worth creating a branch for the release which will be what is used when cutting test releases, when checking portability, for doing the release and for doing any post-release bugfixes.

There's no need to branch if we can do a release within about 1-2 weeks, IMHO. But if we branch, we should branch the library stuff from fptools, too.

Meanwhile, in another branch, Sven can be moving the state of Hugs forwards.

No major changes from my side from now on, I promise. :-)

(I'm trying to be non-commital about which of these two branches should be 'HEAD' and which should be a side-branch - I can see arguments on both sides though convention is that the development branch would be HEAD and the release branch would not be.)

Yep, I'd favour the latter, too. Doing it the other way round would cause excessive merging and would be inconsistent with the way branching is done in fptools, which would be a little bit confusing. Cheers, S.