Jeremy Katz wrote: > On Wed, 2007-05-02 at 12:53 -0400, seth vidal wrote: >> Hey folks, >> I was thinking some about 3.2.x and after. So a couple of options: > [snip] >> 2. don't branch, release 3.2.0 off of HEAD and continue working on HEAD >> but w/o breaking the API while we stabilize and work on new items. > > So I've alluded to this some, but I really lean towards this option.
I was telling seth to branch for 3.2 earlier, but I really meant to tag it now, as I think we're stable enough for the release. Working from head sounds fine, just as long as we (seth) are prepared to release a 3.2.x.y for some bug fix (or just patch the rpm in the spec. whatever.) > > The big reasons why I think it makes sense... > 1) I don't think we have any really huge world breaking things that we > want to do. Lots of incremental improvements, lots of bug fixing and > lots of speed ups > 2) If we go this route, we can regularly push these changes back for > users of F7. This means end users will get the improvements we're > making faster. > > The second is really the big win in my mind. Also, it means that yum in rawhide is only as broken as yum in F7, or thereabouts. That might be nice. -Jame
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ Yum-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.dulug.duke.edu/mailman/listinfo/yum-devel
