Ben Collins-Sussman <sussman@collab.net> writes:
> On Mon, 2004-06-07 at 12:37, C. Michael Pilato wrote:
> > allow me to
> > recommend that we simply state that as a matter of policy, we will
> > keep at most N maintenance branches alive. As new major and minor
> > releases come out, old ones drop off the radar. If we have a policy
> > regarding this, we can better plan announcements, which means users
> > have time to react, and means our volunteer release managers know up
> > front what they're getting themselves into. :-)
>
> Definitely some advantages to that approach... like, predictablity.
>
> But a disadvantage is that it "ties" our support burden to releases. I
> mean, what if, for some reason, Subversion 1.2 doesn't come out for a
> *year*. Now we're obligated to support 1.0.x, even when 3 people are
> left using it?
"... we will keep at most N ..."
^^^^^^^
:-)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Mon Jun 7 19:55:46 2004