Hello. On Mon, 2014-03-03 at 23:23, Carsten Haitzler wrote: > On Mon, 3 Mar 2014 11:10:51 +0100 Stefan Schmidt <[email protected]> > said: > > > Hello. > > > > On Sat, 2014-03-01 at 01:50, Daniel Juyung Seo wrote: > > > Thanks for the stable branch maintenance. > > > > > > Question. Until when are you going to support 1.8 stable release? > > > > A really good question. :) I asked this myself several times now > > without having an good answer. > > > > It boils down to how much time I have left for it. I'm doing the > > release stuff alone right now and with 1.10 starting to form as well > > as 1.9 needs attention 1.8 will most likely be less important for me. > > > > I was hoping to do 1 or 2 more releases and maybe have 1.9.x in such a > > shape that people are willing to upgrade. Hard to say if that is > > realistic or not. We will have a 1.8 release this week. The next > > depends on how much things get backported not only to 1.9 but also > > 1.8. > > > > Maybe I don't even have to decide myself because no new commits show > > up in the 1.8 branches. :) > > > > If anyone wants to do long-term maintenance for 1.8 please let me > > know. I would happily hand it over to someone if they want to go with > > it for longer. > > > > Same goes for 1.9 just contact me if you want to help out. > > here's my take. you want maintenance of 1.8 beyond 1.9 release... volunteer > and do it. i don't think it's stefan's or a core devs job to do that. we just > don't have the manpower for that kind of luxury.
I still want to do a last release from the 1.8 branches to have all pilled up commits in a real tarball release and leave with a clean table so to speak. > you want continued maintenance then upgrade to 1.9. if you ARTIFICIALLY choose > to not upgrade because of some policy - then that is not our problem. upgrade > to get updates. we have a policy of not breaking api/abi so this should not be > a problem upgrading to 1.9 vs wanting a 1.8 bugfix (a bugfix is also as likely > to break api just the same - it's a BUG if we break it). I sadly have to agree that we don't have the manpower to do this right now. I was hoping for some people to join the ranks of a release team but that did not work out. On the positive side we have to see that from 1.7 over 1.8 to 1.9 we improved a lot with actually having releases, providing stable updates to them and now aiming for regular releases. Something like a LTS release might still be possible in the future if enough people show interest and are willing to put work into it. > i think we should put this up on our wiki as a policy to point to as this q > has > been asked several times so far and it's always been this policy to date. I will update the release procedure wiki page later today to cover this. That we only support the curent release until the next comes out. regards Stefan Schmidt ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Subversion Kills Productivity. Get off Subversion & Make the Move to Perforce. With Perforce, you get hassle-free workflows. Merge that actually works. Faster operations. Version large binaries. Built-in WAN optimization and the freedom to use Git, Perforce or both. Make the move to Perforce. http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=122218951&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk _______________________________________________ enlightenment-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/enlightenment-devel
