On Mon, Jun 16, 2014 at 5:29 PM, John Vines <[email protected]> wrote:
> My comfort with this is based solely on the amount of effort and > complexity involved. I have no direct qualms with providing that path, on > the assumption we don't spend an exorbitant amount of hours developing it > and end up with a ridiculous amount of code brought up to support this > which we have to maintain. > > I would also be happier to have some sort of story involved for how to > ensure the 1.4 users migrate to 1.6 in such a way we don't hit a similar > race condition we found for if/when they jump to 1.7/2.0. > > > I think the only way to do this is to state that it's a one-off exception. Presuming we don't want to change our supported upgrade plan to be "upgrade from any previous version to current." -- Sean
