Russell Bryant wrote: > A strict API/ABI freeze is not something I really had in mind for 1.6. If > that > was the case, then we would really need a dedicated 1.6 branch instead of just > using trunk as the staging area for 1.6.X releases. I had figured that once a > new API and related changes had received adequate testing in its developer > branch, that it could be then merged into trunk (and thus, 1.6 releases). > But, > that would break some level of ABI compatability, at least. > > I'm going to have to continue to put some thought into this one.
I have been thinking about this, and I do not think that an API/ABI freeze is something that I would like to do for Asterisk 1.6 at this point. As has been pointed out in other parts of this thread, trunk should always be usable. It may have a few rough edges, which I am hoping that the 1.6 process will help alleviate. I essentially want 1.6.X releases to be release-worthy snapshots of trunk. Take a snapshot of trunk, get a bunch of people to test for rough edges introduced in the last month or two of merging new things, and release it. I don't want to impose anything that will hinder development on 1.6 quite yet. -- Russell Bryant Senior Software Engineer Open Source Team Lead Digium, Inc. _______________________________________________ --Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com-- asterisk-dev mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-dev
