--On 26. Juni 2006 11:25:05 +0100 Chris Withers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
Philipp von Weitershausen wrote:
It's dead from a maintenance point of view. If you still want to
maintain it, be our guest. But you yourself said that maintaining too
many branches is madness.
My point is that we'
Philipp von Weitershausen wrote:
It's dead from a maintenance point of view. If you still want to
maintain it, be our guest. But you yourself said that maintaining too
many branches is madness.
My point is that we're creating too many branches ;-)
Chris
--
Simplistix - Content Management, Zop
On 6/21/06, Philipp von Weitershausen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
There's nothing wrong with software being in production whose particular
line isn't maintained anymore. I have Linux kernels 2.4 and Apaches 1.3
in production. What's your point?
I checked what all my websites run. They are all on
Chris Withers wrote:
> Andreas Jung wrote:
>>
>>> I for one, is NOT interested in backporting fixed in Five trunk to
>>> both Five 1.0, 1.1, 1.3, 1.4 and 1.5, which is what are the current
>>> versions of Five if we say that Zope 2.8 and 2.7 should be still
>>> supported after the release of 2.10.
Andreas Jung wrote:
I for one, is NOT interested in backporting fixed in Five trunk to
both Five 1.0, 1.1, 1.3, 1.4 and 1.5, which is what are the current
versions of Five if we say that Zope 2.8 and 2.7 should be still
supported after the release of 2.10.
We don't talk about Zope 2.7 which i
--On 19. Juni 2006 16:25:32 +0200 Lennart Regebro <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I for one, is NOT interested in backporting fixed in Five trunk to
both Five 1.0, 1.1, 1.3, 1.4 and 1.5, which is what are the current
versions of Five if we say that Zope 2.8 and 2.7 should be still
supported after
On 6/19/06, Lennart Regebro <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I for one, is NOT interested in backporting fixed in Five trunk to
both Five 1.0, 1.1, 1.3, 1.4 and 1.5, which is what are the current
versions of Five if we say that Zope 2.8 and 2.7 should be still
supported after the release of 2.10. If so
On 6/19/06, Chris Withers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Well, it's 2 versions, so far. I.e, current release and last release.
> Unless we decide to change that now.
Is it really?
That's how it has been so far, yes. Maybe we should extend it. But
mind you, that's more work...
I for one, is NOT
Lennart Regebro wrote:
On 6/18/06, Paul Winkler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
+1, I'd like some way to easily know when a release is no longer
maintained. i.e., what's the X in the above formula.
Well, it's 2 versions, so far. I.e, current release and last release.
Unless we decide to change tha
--On 18. Juni 2006 14:46:27 -0400 Christian Theune <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Andreas Jung wrote:
--On 18. Juni 2006 14:36:06 -0400 Christian Theune <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
However, Zope 2.8 is still available for stable download ... so we
currently have 7 branches to watch out for.
Y
--On 18. Juni 2006 14:35:48 -0400 Paul Winkler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Sun, Jun 18, 2006 at 08:30:58PM +0200, Lennart Regebro wrote:
On 6/18/06, Paul Winkler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> +1, I'd like some way to easily know when a release is no longer
> maintained. i.e., what's the X i
Andreas Jung wrote:
--On 18. Juni 2006 14:36:06 -0400 Christian Theune <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
However, Zope 2.8 is still available for stable download ... so we
currently have 7 branches to watch out for.
Yes, but in most cases a fix only affects only Zope 2 or Zope 3. So
we are back to
--On 18. Juni 2006 14:36:06 -0400 Christian Theune <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
However, Zope 2.8 is still available for stable download ... so we
currently have 7 branches to watch out for.
Yes, but in most cases a fix only affects only Zope 2 or Zope 3. So
we are back to 3.
-aj
--
ZOPYX Lt
Lennart Regebro wrote:
On 6/18/06, Paul Winkler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
+1, I'd like some way to easily know when a release is no longer
maintained. i.e., what's the X in the above formula.
Well, it's 2 versions, so far. I.e, current release and last release.
Unless we decide to change tha
On Sun, Jun 18, 2006 at 08:30:58PM +0200, Lennart Regebro wrote:
> On 6/18/06, Paul Winkler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >+1, I'd like some way to easily know when a release is no longer
> >maintained. i.e., what's the X in the above formula.
>
> Well, it's 2 versions, so far. I.e, current releas
On 6/18/06, Paul Winkler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
+1, I'd like some way to easily know when a release is no longer
maintained. i.e., what's the X in the above formula.
Well, it's 2 versions, so far. I.e, current release and last release.
Unless we decide to change that now.
--
Lennart Regeb
On Sun, Jun 18, 2006 at 02:29:14PM -0400, Christian Theune wrote:
> Philipp von Weitershausen wrote:
> >Andreas Jung wrote:
> >>My recommendation:
> >>
> >>1 yr deprecation period as it is now
> >>1 yr + X maintenance period for older branches.
> >
> >+1
> >
> >Note that this should also extend to
Philipp von Weitershausen wrote:
Andreas Jung wrote:
My recommendation:
1 yr deprecation period as it is now
1 yr + X maintenance period for older branches.
+1
Note that this should also extend to the Zope 3 releases. Zope 3.2 is
part of Zope 2.9 and will hence be used for quite some time. Y
Andreas Jung wrote:
> My recommendation:
>
> 1 yr deprecation period as it is now
> 1 yr + X maintenance period for older branches.
+1
Note that this should also extend to the Zope 3 releases. Zope 3.2 is
part of Zope 2.9 and will hence be used for quite some time. Yet,
bugfixes aren't even back
19 matches
Mail list logo
