[mythtv] New Install - 0.16 or CVS?

Jeff Thompson lists at threeputt.org
Sat Oct 30 17:48:00 UTC 2004

Rick, I am involved in several other open source projects, all provide 
some method of seperating fixes to released versions and new changes 
that have not yet been fully tested.

I'm not being critical, but it's surprising to me to see a project the 
size of mythtv that has no development quide or CVS structure 
established to maintain a stabled/released version, as well as an 
unstable/testing version.

For example, surely there have been fixes to 0.16 that have been fullly 
tested and committed since 0.16 was released. Since there is no branch 
for 0.16 fixes, these changes are committed to the same branch (HEAD) 
that all other changes are committed to. There appears to be no way to 
seperate these two types of fixes given the existing CVS structure.

A common approach is to create a branch for a released version for fixes 
(ie. release-0-16-fixes) and allow new development to continue on the 
HEAD. True, this does cause additional work for the 
developers/maintainers to ensure that you don't reintroduce bugs by 
forgetting to merge changes from the fixes branch to the HEAD, but it 
has the advantage that the most stable release of the product is always 

I asked the original question regarding 0.16 vs CVS HEAD stability. What 
I'd like, which I presume is what most mythtv users would like, is the 
most stable version of mythtv. Due to the current CVS structure, it 
would appear that I have to pick 0.16 or CVS HEAD.

Again, I hope that I didn't offend anyone involved in mythtv 
development. It looks like a great project and I wish my h/w would get 
here already so I can actually start building... :)


Jeff Thompson

Richard Hamnett wrote:

>I find the whole idea of asking how stable CVS is, kinda silly....
>it's like asking how long's a piece of string. I could check out CVS
>one day and do a build which is stable, but i could check out a day or
>two later and have it bug ridden, the whole nature of CVS is that it
>is unstable and constantly evolving... if you catch it on a bad day,
>then unlucky!
>On Sat, 30 Oct 2004 08:49:47 +1000, Mark Spieth <mark at dclabs.com.au> wrote:
>>I too use CVS HEAD most of the time. very stable and have not seen problems
>>since just after I started in august.
>>my process was to
>>1. extract the source for the latest stable version package (debian for me)
>>2. make sure it works by makeing packages and installing and running ;-)
>>3. check out HEAD in a different dir
>>4. move all CVS dirs and the debian dir into the stable extracted tree. a
>>nice script will do this for you
>>5. change the version in debian/changelog to something like 0.16.0 (my dev
>>version number for packages)
>>6. change the root dir to mythtv-0.16.0 (same as step 5)
>>7. got to root dev dir (see step 6) and cvs up -d
>>8. do a fakeroot make -f debian/rules clean binary
>>and you have new packages to install which are based on CVS HEAD but have
>>the odd package mod (deb has 2).
>>redhat and others should have a similar setup method.
>>be careful not to update during a partial commit so you have to read the
>>commit list too.
>>If you find something wrong. fix it and submit a patch :)
>>----- Original Message -----
>>From: "Kevin Kuphal" <kuphal at dls.net>
>>To: "Development of mythtv" <mythtv-dev at mythtv.org>
>>Sent: Saturday, October 30, 2004 8:17 AM
>>Subject: Re: [mythtv] New Install - 0.16 or CVS?
>>>Jeff Thompson wrote:
>>>>Hi, I'm waiting for newegg to deliver all of the components for my
>>>>first mythtv system. I'm trying to decide whether I should install
>>>>using the 0.16 release or go with the CVS HEAD version. Can anyone
>>>>using CVS HEAD comment on the stability vs. the 0.16 release?
>>>>On a related note, the CVS tree doesn't appear to use branches as part
>>>>of the normal development process. While each release is tagged in
>>>>CVS, it would appear that there is no "stable" branch for fixes to the
>>>>latest release. Are all fixes to the released version and bleeding
>>>>edge changes made to the HEAD?
>>>>I have searched, but did not find a document explaining the mythtv
>>>>development process, so I apologize if this information is available
>>>I have not found MythTV CVS to be unstable and I run it nearly 100% of
>>>the time, even shortly after releases as the CVS HEAD quickly adds new
>>>features and is in near constant development.  I have rarely run into
>>>any showstopper bugs in CVS and those that are found are fixed promptly
>>>once reported.  For example, just a week or so ago I was experiencing an
>>>occasional segfault and with only a few rounds of reports here with
>>>Isaac, he was able to fix my specific issue.
>>>I wouldn't have any issue running MythTV CVS HEAD.  I would be more
>>>sensitive to the revisions of your drivers and other components which
>>>are far more likely to cause problems.
>>>mythtv-dev mailing list
>>>mythtv-dev at mythtv.org
>>Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
>>Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
>>Version: 6.0.782 / Virus Database: 528 - Release Date: 10/22/2004
>>mythtv-dev mailing list
>>mythtv-dev at mythtv.org
>>mythtv-dev mailing list
>>mythtv-dev at mythtv.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mythtv.org/pipermail/mythtv-dev/attachments/20041030/368e5f37/attachment.htm

More information about the mythtv-dev mailing list