From: Mark Gilbert (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Date: Tue Mar 18 2003 - 06:23:26 EST
On Tue, 2003-03-18 at 06:10, Marc Maurer wrote:
> Sure I can do that as well (and I will). But existing users of the dailt
> rpms will have problems upgrading their installed rpms (eg.
> 1.1.3.YYYYMMDDHHMM < 22.214.171.124). If we bump to 1.9.x this will be no
> problem. Also (hopefully) 1.9.x will give users a bit more urge to try
> it out, seeing it closing in to 2.0.
These aren't end-users, and they know it isn't production code or even
supported binaries. They should be able to force install (aka
downgrade), or they shouldn't (and probably can't) use cvs snapshots.
1.9.x gives a false impression of readiness that might fit better in a
release candidate. Especially since even if we release with no win32,
it seems silly to be releasing 1.9.x with temporary complete bustage of
one of our largest platforms.
Believe it or not, 1.1.4 will still have a lot of bugs, even if it is
far less than 1.1.3.
For these reasons amongst others I feel 1.9.x could be a bit premature.
Of course, the call comes down to dom.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Tue Mar 18 2003 - 06:30:54 EST