Malcolm Rowe wrote:
>On Thu, Oct 06, 2005 at 03:44:17PM -0500, kfogel@collab.net wrote:
>
>
>>I think we should deprecate the 1.1.x line when 1.3 comes out, as we
>>did for 1.0.x when 1.2 came out.
>>
>>Anyone disagree?
>>
>>
>
>I don't have any really strong opinions, and I'm "just a user", but
>I do feel it might be too soon. On the one hand, it obviously makes
>sense, keeping support active for just the 'current' and 'previous'
>lines. However ...
>
>When 1.2.0 was released (mid-May 2005), the 1.1.x branch had already
>been available for 8 months - and there were strong reasons for people
>to have upgraded to it from the 1.0.x line (FSFS, performance, and a
>ton of bugfixes).
>
>Fast-forward to mid-November, when I'm predicting 1.3.0 will be released.
>The 1.2.x line will have been available for only 6 months. Furthermore,
>1.1.x still works pretty well for a lot of people, especially if they
>don't need locking, and, as someone mentions every so often, several
>of the Linux server distributions - SuSE, most recently, wasn't it? -
>are still on a 1.1.x version.
>
>Like I said though, no really strong arguments...
>
>
The last 1.1.x release is 6 months old, and I can't remember a single
request for a new bugfix release in that line. When we say "deprecated"
in this case, we mean that we won't make further 1.1.x releases; *not*
that newer servers won't work with 1.1.x clients, or some such. Our
compatibility guarantees stay in place.
Of course, anyone is still free to volunteer to produce a new 1.1.x
release, if they're prepared to go through all the grief of getting
patches reviewed and tarballs voted on. As far as Linux server distros
are concerned, they usually roll their own patches without our help anyway.
That said, +1 for killing off 1.1.x.
-- Brane
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Fri Oct 7 03:59:55 2005