On Mon, 2004-06-07 at 12:08, C. Michael Pilato wrote:
> But as we agreed, perhaps because of the binary compatibility rules,
> it's safe to halt work on the 1.0.x line the minute that 1.1 is
> released. If a critical bug in 1.0.x, we can fix it in trunk and
> backport to 1.1.x, and tell 1.0.x users to upgrade to 1.1.x. Of
> course, this only holds so long as the upgrade from 1.0.x to 1.1.x is
> painless and comes at no additional cost to users.
>
> Are we understanding the version numbering scheme right? Is this an
> acceptable plan of attack?
Actually, Karl and I think the answer is somewhere in the middle. On
one extreme, we could decide that the instant 1.1 is released, we stop
supporting the 1.0.x line. On the other extreme, we could decide to
support the 1.0.x line forever.
But Karl's suggestion is that for "little while" we support both 1.0.x
and 1.1.x lines. After it's clear that 1.1 is being widely used and
considered stable by most people, *then* we announce that we're dropping
support for 1.0.x. This is a fuzzy decision to make, but it probably
means supporting both lines for only a few months.
(Karl's opinion, which I now agree with, is that it's a bit too harsh to
demand that people upgrade to 1.1 the instant it's released.)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Mon Jun 7 19:20:28 2004