A process for core library fixes and improvements

I believe in staying very close to elm in semantics and implementation, so I like the actual idea of a release branch. Unfortunately I think the elm core team will still require a change of name and logo. In my humble opinion, when the name and logo changes, it is a fork. You can’t call it a release branch anymore.

So my two cents is that we should fork now, but make very minimal changes on the fork (with exactly the same minimalist / conservative attitude that one would adopt in a release branch, which Rupert has described). Somehow I think the elm core team will not like the idea of a release branch with the same name and logo as elm, but I would be happy to be corrected if I’m wrong.

I think most of us are agreed that we don’t want huge changes. Just the ability to make essential minimal changes in a timely fashion.

2 Likes