Aaron Plattner <[email protected]> writes: > Either of these sounds fine to me. Having the "major bug fixes only" > date double as the ABI freeze date has a nice simplicity to it. That > window might be a tad short for us to try to target same-day support but > hopefully it's close enough for people.
Let's plan on making an explicit ABI/API freeze one month after the end of the merge window. Do you end up generating some kind of summary of API/ABI changes that we could post soon after the end of the merge window so that we could explicitly review that before the API/ABI was frozen? > Sounds good to me. Since I'm reverting the support changes in the > driver, I personally don't care whether the ABI number gets bumped to 18 > or not: it's just some minor s/17/18/ in a few places if it does. I'll bump the ABI number to ensure that all drivers get rebuilt once we do change. We've got a 16-bit space of numbers to work with, which seems likely to be sufficient even for X. -- [email protected]
pgpLmFR8T79Wd.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ [email protected]: X.Org development Archives: http://lists.x.org/archives/xorg-devel Info: http://lists.x.org/mailman/listinfo/xorg-devel
