Re: "Subversion 1.5, Technology Preview"

On Thu, Feb 28, 2008 at 12:02 PM, Justin Erenkrantz
<justin_at_erenkrantz.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 28, 2008 at 6:40 AM, C. Michael Pilato <cmpilato_at_collab.net> wrote:
> > Maybe it's time to rethink the model. Maybe we should get 1.5 out the door,
> > roll 1.6 with tree conflicts detection and Kamesh's merge algorithm
> > improvements and whatever other mostly-done things can be finalized and
> > delivered in under 6 months, and then seriously take on the challenge of
> > Subversion 2.0.
>
> While I'm behind doing a quick 1.6 follow-on to 1.5 if that's what's
> needed, but I shudder at yet another drawn-out release cycle. If we
> go down that 2.0 route, I'd want us to quickly churn out 2.x releases
> rather then re-entering the never-never-land that 1.5's been in.

I should probably change the subject, since this comment is about 2.0.
 I like the idea too, but how would we deal with the compatibility
issues? How could we know every compatibility item we planned to
break in that first release, and once we release an official 2.0. then
we cannot break compatibility with that release until 3.0.

-- 
Thanks
Mark Phippard
http://markphip.blogspot.com/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe_at_subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help_at_subversion.tigris.org