[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20140609112352.1e7ad51e@ncopa-desktop.alpinelinux.org>
Date: Mon, 9 Jun 2014 11:23:52 +0200
From: Natanael Copa <ncopa@...inelinux.org>
To: Rich Felker <dalias@...c.org>
Cc: musl@...ts.openwall.com
Subject: Re: musl 1.0.x branch
On Fri, 6 Jun 2014 13:56:17 -0400
Rich Felker <dalias@...c.org> wrote:
> I'm about to prepare the 1.0.3 release, and I've been thinking a bit
> about the future of the 1.0.x branch. Specifically I'd like to gauge
> the extent to which it's being used. So far cherry-picking fixes to it
> has been pretty easy, but it's an extra task to keep up with, and the
> cherry-picking is probably going to turn into active backporting
> somewhere in the near future as the rs-1.0 and master branches
> continue to diverge.
>
> If I don't hear back that there's significant use of the 1.0.x
> releases by multiple projects, I'll probably plan to discontinue them
> in the next 4 to 6 months, and in the mean time, to release only when
> there are serious bugs (as opposed to releasing alongside every 1.1.x
> release). Does this sound reasonable?
Yes. I guess you could just drop 1.0.x support now and consider re-open
it if you get complains.
> If anyone's using 1.0.x not for the sake of stability but because it
> works better in some way for your setup (e.g. size, performance,
> application compatibility, etc.) please let me know about that too so
> we can see if there's a reasonable way to make 1.1.x work just as well
> for you.
Alpine Linux appreciate the idea of stable/maintenance branches, but we
figured that we'd be better off with the 1.1.x for out 3.0 stable
release. (which is kinda beta anyways). We need the new features.
So no interest in 1.0.x branch for Alpine Linux.
>
> Rich
-nc
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use?
Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia
and check out these
guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.
