On 5 June 2017 at 16:09, Jochen Wiedmann <jochen.wiedm...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Mon, Jun 5, 2017 at 5:06 PM, sebb <seb...@gmail.com> wrote: > >>> I'd like us to push out a new release with minimal changes at any >>> time. If we have, for example, 1.6 as the target, and the previous >>> release had 1.5 as the target, then we'd loose that ability, IMO. >> >> Sorry, I don't follow. >> Are there some missing words from the above? > > Indeed there are. So, to repeat that: > > I'd like us to be able to push out a new release with minimal changes > at any given time. If we have, for example, 1.6 as the target, and the > previous > release had 1.5 as the target, then we'd loose that ability, IMO. > (Think security releases.We've had quite a few in the past.)
Understood, but I'm not sure why you feel the lack of a 1.6 release would prevent a security release. Surely we could just apply the fixes to the previously released code and change to 1.6 at the same time? Or would there need to be fixes to the code just to update to 1.6? In which case releasing a 1.6 would ensure those were fixed at our leisure instead of having to be fixed as part of a rush to release security patch. Is that what you mean? > Jochen > > > > -- > The next time you hear: "Don't reinvent the wheel!" > > http://www.keystonedevelopment.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2014/10/evolution-of-the-wheel-300x85.jpg > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
