Am Dienstag, den 31.07.2007, 10:05 +0000 schrieb Robert Burrell Donkin: > On 7/31/07, Stefano Bagnara <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Robert Burrell Donkin ha scritto: > > > trunk has been dubbed 'next-major' for a long time now. a lot of extra > > > function has been added to trunk and though a full release is > > > definitely a long way in the future, the time seems right now to > > > decide that a future release from this code stream will be designated > > > 3.0. > > > > This is not correct, > > (IMHO correct but incomplete: the artifacts created by the trunk build > are named next-major) > > > let me explain: > > next-major was the name assigned to a tentative release and branching > > trunk was in the plan for next-major. The difference between trunk and > > next-major was in the planning/scheduling and was present in JIRA when > > we used this labels to discuss what was going to land next-major > > (storage/config compatible) and what would have had to wait the > > following (storage/config incompatible). > > i would prefer the storage/config compatibility issue to be managed by > experimental modules. this means that people can code whatever new > features without having to wait for some future next-major to be cut.
This sound good to me. But what's about core changes ? How the changes will be handled there ? Do we need to "copy" and paste core stuff ? I think we should think about if we really want todo this... Maybe throw away the compatiblity now is not a bad action. But if we do so we should take care todo a code design now. I think the worst whould be to change everything again in next release after 3.0. Just my 2 cent bye Norman --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
