Shawn pretty well nailed it. Especially this bit:

"...unless you are also volunteering to be the release manager".

There'll be some push-back even if you're willing to be the RM if it's
a big change, but that's a discussion for we'll have when there's a
concrete proposal.

Best,
Erick

On Wed, Mar 25, 2015 at 7:34 AM, Shawn Heisey <[email protected]> wrote:
> On 3/25/2015 3:24 AM, Ramkumar R. Aiyengar wrote:
>> I know patches are generally for bug fixes, but given that it is the end
>> of line branch for 4x, do we accommodate requests for back porting small
>> features, or just ask them to patch it themselves?
>
> I would appreciate a sanity check from someone who has a longer history
> with the project, but this is my understanding:
>
> If there is a critical or trivial bugfix, or a very useful usability
> enhancement that can be considered an easy and safe change (a small
> patch that doesn't affect API compatibility at all), then it might make
> sense to backport, but unless you are also volunteering to be the
> release manager, it may be quite a while before users actually see a
> 4.10.x release with the change.
>
> As time passes and branch_5x diverges further from the 4.10 branch
> (which is now considered to be in maintenance mode), it will become
> increasingly difficult to backport.  In some ways, this means that 4x
> will be effectively dead as soon as we have a battle-tested 5.x version
> that we are willing to recommend for even a conservative novice user.
>
> For the most part, unless the patch addresses a serious problem that
> affects a lot of users, the user will need to patch the 4.x code themselves.
>
> This info should probably be in the wiki, if it is not already.  I
> didn't look.
>
> Thanks,
> Shawn
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
>

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]

Reply via email to