Colm MacCarthaigh wrote: > > On Thu, May 18, 2006 at 11:38:53AM -0400, Jim Jagielski wrote: > > What I'm saying is that there is a BIG difference between actively > > *supported* and actively *developed*. As far as I'm concerned, we > > still support 1.3.x, for our huge install base of legacy users. > > What does "support" mean in this context? Are we talking about > responding to security notices, producing security-related patches and > security-related releases? >
At a minimum, yes. > Why would we ever stop doing that as long as someone was willing to > write the patch? > Well, if someone submitted a patch for 1.2.x or 1.0.x, I'd doubt we'd consider it :) -- =========================================================================== Jim Jagielski [|] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [|] http://www.jaguNET.com/ "If you can dodge a wrench, you can dodge a ball."
