On Thu, 21 Apr 2005, James Yonan wrote: > I would like to merge your IPv6 patch into the 2.1 branch, once it gets > started (I'd like to keep the 2.0.x branch as stable as possible, with > minimalistic changes that don't go beyond bug fixes and small patches).
Speaking of branches; I have updated the FreeBSD OpenVPN 1.6 port to 2.0, overthrowing requests to keep the 1.6 port around and start a new openvpn2 port instead, on the assumption that OpenVPN 2.0 is in the same line as 1.6 was in my perception, and not a separate branch, and I've assumed that we won't see further 1.6 branches. Was this correct? Would you think it's important to keep an "openvpn16" port (at 1.6.0) available or is 2.0 sufficient? I'd think 2.0 is sufficient as it's a really smooth upgrade from 1.6 (the FreeBSD port hasn't dared use pthreads since FreeBSD 4 has had three competing thread models for a long time - so we're not losing this feature in the FreeBSD port). Thank you for your great work on OpenVPN 2.0. -- Matthias Andree
