Stefan Sperling wrote:
> 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
Likewise, I've floated the idea of releasing 1.4.7, but nobody has responded,
either positively or negatively. I (possibly mistakenly) interpreted the lack
of interest as...well, lack of interest.
-Hyrum
Received on 2008-08-07 18:17:17 CEST