Dale Ghent wrote: > > On Sat, 2 Feb 2002, Jim Jagielski wrote: > > | I'd like for us to consider releasing 1.3.24 specifically for the Solaris > | pthread fix. I offer to be RM. I'll update STATUS for voting and comments. > > I don't know, I think it might be premature to do that. > > I still think that it's a bad idea to unconditionally include libpthread > on Solaris builds in cases where HPSA is not enabled, which would be > (relatively) rare situations because HPSA is not the default for Solaris.
But it *is*. That's the point. Right now, 1.3.23 is broken for Solaris. And Solaris is an important enough and popular enough OS that it warrants something like this. > > Also, I think that since 1.3.9, the 1.3 tree has suffered from enough > "oops" releases to warrant maybe acumulating a few more fixes, then > testing, and then releasing. I do believe time is on our side for this > one and shouldnt be rushed so soon in the wake of .23. > Why? If we have a fix, then let's release it. Considering that the bug means that Solaris is broken "out of the box" is Not Good, in my opinion :) Fast turnaround is one of the advantages of open source and how we work... I'd prefer being slammed because we had 2 releases "close to each other" than having code out there that's not right, and we *know* it's not right. If we had the concept of patch level with our releases then it would be different. Yes, we could just release a patch, and we should do that anyway, but if the whole reason why we should release 1.3.24 is because we "just" released 1.3.23, I don't think that's strong enough. I don't mind putting forth the effort to release .24, and saying that unless you're running Solaris there's no compelling reason to upgrade... Just my opinion :) -- =========================================================================== Jim Jagielski [|] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [|] http://www.jaguNET.com/ "A society that will trade a little liberty for a little order will lose both and deserve neither" - T.Jefferson
