On Fri, Dec 10, 2010 at 8:45 PM, Nick Mathewson <[email protected]> wrote:
> Hi, all! Here's a thing I wrote up to try to explain a proposed > policy for what to backport to 2.0.x once it's stable, and what to > backport to 1.4.x after 2.0.x is released. Absent major problems with > it, the current Libevent core developers are probably going to stick > with this for official releases, though of course nothing is written > in stone. > > In other news, we have had almost no bugs found in 2.0.9-rc so far. > Absent big issues getting discovered, we'll probably be releasing > 2.0.10-stable some time in the next week or two. > The one scary thing is that good changes will get stuck in a year or multi-year development process. A good tempo for a project like this would be 6 month intervals so we have a chance of regularly hitting distros like Fedora and Ubuntu and enough useful changes have probably accumulated in that interval. Consider 2.0, which is a huge improvement over 1.4, but has yet to be found on disros I know of. With the 6 month release cycle, doing at minimum 1 or 2 year stable periods would quickly become overwhelming. Another page from the Linux playbook: nominate "Long Term Support" releases for "enterprise" customers that want to bundle, and end mainstream support for the intermediate releases after the the next 2 are stable. Regards, Kevin
