On Fri, Aug 30, 2002 at 10:17:52AM -0700, Aaron Bannert wrote: > No, that's exactly the problem we have with 1.3 right now. There *are* > people who are willing to backport fixes and even features to the 1.3 > tree, it's only a faction of the group here that *doesn't* want that to > happen. I see no reason to close any httpd source tree. If it's just one > person complaining that they don't want to backport their changes, then > they shouldn't do it. This is a volunteer organization, do only what you > want to do, but don't prevent anyone else from have the same abilities.
Um. I refuse to get stranded in 2.1 if I'm the only sucker there. I don't want to spend *my* time forward-porting fixes because everyone else is still on 2.0. That's a ridiculous waste. I'd be spending all my time merging. You can't have it both ways - "enforce frequent branching" *and* "don't require people to commit to the latest branch." That's going to kill everyone off. Pick one. I honestly don't care where this ends up. It just needs to get in to our tree somewhere. The aaa code is broken. It needs to be fixed (and I believe the patches we already have start the process). 2.0, 2.1, 3.0, 1.4 - whatever. I'm perfectly happy to break backwards-compatibility. -- justin
