On Fri, Feb 19, 2010 at 2:49 PM, Doug Cutting <[email protected]> wrote: > Eli Collins wrote: >>> >>> My concern is more about when the next branch from trunk will be made. >> >> Does there need to be a dependency? > > No. I just wanted to note that, from my point of view, releasing from the > existing 0.21 branch is not sufficient, that, regardless, we still need to > release from trunk soon, and we need a schedule going forward for when > future branches from trunk will be made. >
Agreed. Releasing a 21 won't settle the release process question or tell us when the first major release is. Maybe we could get 21 behind us and have a separate discussion covering those. >> Could the vote on whether 22 is backwards compatible with 20 be >> independent of what we call 1.0? > > We minimally need to declare whether releases are major or minor. I was assuming 21 would be another minor release, didn't hear otherwise when it was branched. I didn't interpret the compatibility vote as a suggestion that we should retroactively consider 20 to be the first major release, but rather a suggestion for voting that we don't remove APIs in 22 that were deprecated in 20. Owen, please correct me if I'm wrong. Thanks, Eli
