Carsten Ziegeler wrote:
Upayavira wrote:
Antonio Gallardo wrote:
Exactly - and we should try to make sense out of our version numbers especially wrt compatibility.As is leaving things alone so you don't take the risk of breaking things :-)
If 2.1 will work without this "feature" => please remove it. Cleaning the
house is good. ;-)
I think we should be keeping 2.1.X as stable as possible, and be tidying trunk.
We therefore need to be thinking about how to get trunk released within a reasonable time (6 months?), and therefore be prepared to delay some features until 2.3 if their development is going to take too long.
After all, 2.1.X is a _maintenance_ branch, but that doesn't seem too much like how we're using it - we're adding stuff to it that should go in 2.2, only because we don't know when 2.2 will be out, we're not happy to just have it there.
Regards, Upayavira
Regards, Upayavira
