On Thu, Aug 07, 2008 at 10:33:10AM +0100, Julian Foad wrote:
> Hyrum K. Wright wrote:
> > Peter Samuelson wrote:
> > > However, if all you mean is to do a regular 1.6 release by branching
> > > trunk to 1.6.x soonish, that's a different matter. That seems OK, so
> > > long as it doesn't imply shortening the serious-bugs-and-security-fixes
> > > support window of 1.4.x too drastically.
> >
> > We wouldn't change the process for 1.6, just the time frame. 1.6.x will be
> > branched from trunk.
> >
> > I have no data on this, but it feels like the 1.4.x line is already dead in most
> > developers' minds.
>
> Just a word about maintaining 1.4.x:
> If we can keep providing "official support and maintenance" for 1.4.x
> while in practice finding there is almost never anything serious enough
> to back-port, that's the best of both worlds.
STATUS on 1.4.x is not empty. I proposed backporting r30004
about 4 months ago, but it has not received any attention since:
http://svn.collab.net/repos/svn/branches/1.4.x/STATUS
Stefan
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe_at_subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help_at_subversion.tigris.org
Received on 2008-08-07 11:51:04 CEST