> -----Original Message----- > From: David Sommerseth [mailto:openvpn.l...@topphemmelig.net] > On 02/04/12 20:50, Alon Bar-Lev wrote: > > On Mon, Apr 2, 2012 at 8:31 PM, Adriaan de Jong <dej...@fox-it.com> > > wrote: > >>> -----Original Message----- From: Alon Bar-Lev > >>> [mailto:alon.bar...@gmail.com] Sent: maandag 2 april 2012 > >>> 12:42 To: David Sommerseth Cc:
... > >>> > >>> Right. Next stage is getting rid of syshead.h... The following is > to > >>> cleanup the crypto, I though that if someone can work on this in > >>> parallel we will do this twice as fast :) > >>> > >>> But before we continue we need to stabilize the project again, > >>> creating the missing repositories, deciding about the > >>> github/sourceforge is needed. Deciding about the way to review and > >>> merge large changes. > >>> > >> > >> I'd prefer to leave further modularisation for 2.4. We could even > >> make that a more general goal for 2.4, modularising not just > >> crypto/SSL, but also authentication, and maybe even some of the > >> network stuff. It would be nice to leave a few targets for 2.4 :). > >> > >> I don't see the need to further delay 2.3 for this, as it is not a > >> bug fix. Others might disagree here, and the topic is open for > debate > >> :). In general, it might be a good idea to freeze development of 2.3 > >> at some point to prevent endless alpha syndrome. > >> > >> Adriaan > >> > > > > Well, I don't care about version numbers... they are just snapshots > in > > time. We need a branch with this one way or the other... If that > > branch is good, it can enter the next version whatever it may be... > > Adriaan got a good point, and we've kind of settled on the features > we've kicked into the coming 2.3 release. I hope that we can push out > an alpha-2 release when things have begun to stabilise on master again. > > It would be good to have a beta release out before the summer and an RC > release during the autumn. Aiming for a 2.3 release towards the end of > the year. This is not a plan carved into stone, and if we're able to > move faster; I'd appreciate that very much. But this is the general > idea which has been discussed/suggested a couple of times on IRC. > However, I'm trying to be realistic as well. So there's room for 2-3 > releases in each stage before the final release. And we'll see how > many we end up with in the end. > > But I agree that additional features we don't want into 2.3 could go > into the experimental branch in openvpn-testing.git. That's mostly a > copy of 'master' (I've been lazy to update it lately, but pushed out an > update again now), that's the purpose of this branch. > Perhaps it's time to determine a freezing point for OpenVPN 2.3? Let's say after the new build system is in, but before any further modularisation? Adriaan
