Thanks guys. To be clear, I don't think that this change is worth a
release. If at all, I was planning to just go on the back of a 4.10.5 if
there was one (I know at least of one thread where it was mentioned
sometime back, but I realise it might not happen..)
On 25 Mar 2015 15:48, "Erick Erickson" <[email protected]> wrote:

> 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