duplicity-team team mailing list archive

[Michael Terry <mike@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

On 20 November 2013 05:49, <edgar.soldin@xxxxxx> wrote:

> any reason why you sent this to the "inner circle" list but not to
> duplicity talk for a wider audience?
>

Oh, I just figured this was maintainer talk.  Wasn't trying to hide
anything.  We can move to duplicity-talk if that's better.


Ken's decision, but i doubt he'd like the additional work load. aside from
> the fact that contributors would have to provide two branches henceforth.
>

I imagine contributors would only ever develop against trunk (0.7).  In the
rare occasion where a critical bug should be backported, we can directly
apply the branch to the 0.6 branch and push out a new release.  I'd hope
this would be an at-most once a year thing.


btw. Ken, we should remove the 'beta' status from the website! duplicity
> far from perfect is definitely not beta anymore.
>

Likewise, what's our criteria for dropping the leading 0 in the version?
:)  Maybe we can jump from 0.6 to 1.0.  Or if that sounds too much like
we're declaring "Mission Accomplished" maybe go from 0.6 to 7.0...  :)


do future imports really work with any old python version? or are there
> versions that e.g. didn't have the 'unicode_literals' .. so that using
> future imports will enforce minimal minor versions for the python runtime
> e.g. you have to install python 2.6.10 'cause 2.6.1 didn't have it at that
> time?
>

Python wouldn't introduce new features like that in a point release.
'unicode_literals' and 'print_function' were both introduced in 2.6.
That's the main reason to want the bump.


Ken: any idea about all the branches on launchpad? what to do with them?
> keep them for reference?
>

Which branches?  They should all be able to stay around...

-mt