Hi Miguel, I'm referring to 3.9, 3.10.1, etc. i.e. the current version being 3.10.1. So I guess it should be considered the "3.x" series.
I'm meaning that we shouldn't preclude there being a 3.11, or 3.12, if there is a critical bug. Also, do you have an answer to the distro question? Thanks, Martin On 24 October 2014 19:13, Miguel de Icaza <mig...@xamarin.com> wrote: > Hello Martin, > > There is no such thing as a "3.x.x series". It does not exist. It > never did. > > You must be confused. > > Miguel > > On Fri, Oct 24, 2014 at 12:34 PM, Martin Thwaites < > monofo...@my2cents.co.uk> wrote: > >> Hi Miguel, >> >> I think my preference would be to have the 3.x.x series continue (as >> security fix only) with all the profiles, and essentially have it be a >> legacy branch. Then have the 4.x.x series by a .NET 4.5+ only code base. >> I think it should continue if people are willing to support it, but the >> contributors who don't want to have to support it (or don't have the time >> to implement hacks for it) don't have to. >> >> From a communication perspective it would be easier to get across saying >> that "From mono 4.0 onwards, we only support the 4.5 profile" rather than >> 3.11.x onwards as it's not as easy to remember which 3.x number it was when >> it stopped. A decision and a change like that does really feel "major" and >> therefore warrant the change. >> >> The other question I have is around the linux distros that ship mono as >> standard (I think Ubuntu does). Do you perceive this having an affect on >> them, i.e. they will never ship 4.0 as it doesn't cater for .NET 2.0 >> applications and there are some core pieces that rely on it? >> >> Thanks, >> Martin >> >> On 22 October 2014 22:18, Miguel de Icaza <mig...@xamarin.com> wrote: >> >>> Hey, >>> >>> Mhm, that is a good idea. Will think about it. >>> >>> Right now we were just planning on calling the next one Mono 3.12. But >>> perhaps the time has come for a nice bump! >>> >>> Miguel >>> >>> On Wed, Oct 22, 2014 at 4:21 PM, Martin Thwaites < >>> monofo...@my2cents.co.uk> wrote: >>> >>>> Hi Miguel, >>>> >>>> Would you be looking at calling this Mono 4.0? Not that it makes any >>>> difference really, it just seems there's been a lot of improvements in >>>> recently, and an announcement of a new version me give some renewed >>>> interest. >>>> >>>> Thanks, >>>> Martin >>>> >>>> On 22 October 2014 21:10, Miguel de Icaza <mig...@xamarin.com> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Hey Alex, >>>>> >>>>> It is very repetitive work, so what I wanted to do was to write a perl >>>>> script to remove the *obvious* ifdefs. The tool would remove only those >>>>> that match the following criteria (more or less): >>>>> >>>>> - Remove toplevel #if NET_2_0 with the final #endif >>>>> - Only remove those that contain those preprocessor directives >>>>> >>>>> And then have a human do the more fine-tuned approach. There are >>>>> a couple more defines that I remember could be automated, but I would love >>>>> to have this in the form of a script. >>>>> >>>>> I am afraid of applying a patch like that blindly, because there are >>>>> no exact guarantees of what happened without reviewing the whole file. So >>>>> a script with the invariants would take a lot of my nervousness out. >>>>> >>>>> Also, when I did it once, I had a setup where I rebuilt the assemblies >>>>> and compared the output. This would ensure that removal of ifdefs did not >>>>> change the resulting binaries. >>>>> >>>>> On Wed, Oct 22, 2014 at 4:04 PM, akoeplinger < >>>>> alex.koeplin...@outlook.com> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Sounds like a good thing ;-) >>>>>> >>>>>> I've got a branch in my fork where I removed the NET_2_0 ifdefs: >>>>>> https://github.com/akoeplinger/mono/compare/remove-net20-ifdefs, >>>>>> @kumpera >>>>>> told me a while ago that removing the 2.0 profile is on the horizon >>>>>> when I >>>>>> asked about why the ifdefs are still there. >>>>>> >>>>>> I refrained from making a PR so far because it is quite huge, do you >>>>>> think >>>>>> now would be a good time? >>>>>> >>>>>> -- Alex >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> -- >>>>>> View this message in context: >>>>>> http://mono.1490590.n4.nabble.com/Heads-up-Elimination-of-the-2-0-and-4-0-profiles-tp4664323p4664325.html >>>>>> Sent from the Mono - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com. >>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>> Mono-devel-list mailing list >>>>>> Mono-devel-list@lists.ximian.com >>>>>> http://lists.ximian.com/mailman/listinfo/mono-devel-list >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> Mono-devel-list mailing list >>>>> Mono-devel-list@lists.ximian.com >>>>> http://lists.ximian.com/mailman/listinfo/mono-devel-list >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> >> >
_______________________________________________ Mono-devel-list mailing list Mono-devel-list@lists.ximian.com http://lists.ximian.com/mailman/listinfo/mono-devel-list