duplicity-team team mailing list archive

[Kenneth Loafman <kenneth@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

Peter Schuller wrote:
>> What I'd hate to see happen is that debian/rhel/etc makes a new
>> release and ends up grabbing such a "not recommended" release because
>> it was the latest version at the right (wrong) moment. The result
>> would likely be (1) support hell for 4+ years, (2) unnecessary bad
>> reputation because of many people having issues over a significant
>> period of time.
> 
> Btw, the reason I am not suggesting that we do something like
> security/critical point releases is that (1) it's more releng work,
> and in particular (2) duplicity is not a major/high-profile software
> package enough that distributions are likely to expend a lot of effort
> tracking point releases and doing release engineering.
> 
> Rather my suggestion was designed to just avoid "leaking" a "bad"
> release into a distribution without the distribution people having to
> expend more effort - while at the same time not imposing lots of work
> for maintenance and not hindering early-adopters from grabbing new
> releases and reporting issues.

On the website I made the distinction between stable and development
several days ago.  I think it needs to be reflected in a series as well.
 Until the trunk series is stable, we'll need to maintain the 0.5
series, and so on.

I'll make a 'stable' branch ending at 0.5.18 and leave 'trunk' as is.

...Ken