On 01/02/2017 04:11 PM, William A Rowe Jr wrote:
So far, discussions are polarized on a single axis...
East: Let's work on 3.0; whatever is going on in 2.4 won't distract me,
I won't spend time reviewing enhancements, because 3.0 is the goal.
West: Let's keep the energy going on 2.4 enhancements, I won't spend
time on 3.0 usability because it isn't ready or necessary.
Can I put my checkmark in "neither"?
I'm in favor of a 2.6 and/or 3.0 release when it's obvious that the
benefits to us and our users outweigh the costs of spinning up another
release branch, and at this point in time I'm not convinced we've
reached that tipping point.
Until we get there, I would like to continue backporting as much as
possible from trunk. Those who are following the 2.4.x branches in
production will get the most benefit; those who are locked to a distro
snapshot will miss out, sure, but they're missing out anyway. (We can
probably help *marginally* with that by separating bugfix releases from
feature releases. There's another in-progress thread with that suggestion.)
So I'd like to know, in light of a perpetual chain of (often build
and/or run-time breaking regression) enhancements, if there is support
for a 2.4.24.x release chain during the 3.0 transition? And support for
potentially 3x backports to 2.4.x, 2.4.24.x and 2.2.x, of really serious
bug fixes?
I'll echo Eric here -- if it's necessary, sure. I'm not convinced it's
necessary yet. There are other ways to ensure quality releases, and
there are two or three threads actively discussing them, and I'll be
actively committing time to pursue some of them.
--Jacob
