Il 12/08/2015 08:45, Christopher James Halse Rogers ha scritto:
>
> On Wed, Aug 12, 2015 at 2:02 PM, Daniel van Vugt
> wrote:
>> My personal experience (and what I've observed in our users over years
>> of playing customer support) is that plenty of intelligent people
>> prefer LTS over the lates
On Wed, Aug 12, 2015 at 2:02 PM, Daniel van Vugt
wrote:
My personal experience (and what I've observed in our users over
years of playing customer support) is that plenty of intelligent
people prefer LTS over the latest release. For stability and long
term support. I feel that's a reasonable
My personal experience (and what I've observed in our users over years
of playing customer support) is that plenty of intelligent people prefer
LTS over the latest release. For stability and long term support. I feel
that's a reasonable and intelligent decision to make if someone wants to
keep
Is there some external interest in Mir that is prompting this? Do we have
evidence that there are people that want to contribute but find it
inconvenient to do so? If so, assuming they have a good reason, it'd make
sense to support older OS versions. If not, then it doesn't make sense to
create ext
On Wed, Aug 12, 2015 at 12:17 PM, Daniel van Vugt
wrote:
We did. C++14 was completely unnecessary and the reason why you can't
build Mir on our latest LTS today (without PPAs etc). The change to
the code was mostly cosmetic. Yes, that did make our lives slightly
easier in parts, but to what co
We did. C++14 was completely unnecessary and the reason why you can't
build Mir on our latest LTS today (without PPAs etc). The change to the
code was mostly cosmetic. Yes, that did make our lives slightly easier
in parts, but to what cost? If the cost is that some great developers
using trusty
On Wed, Aug 12, 2015 at 12:03 PM, Daniel van Vugt
wrote:
I feel that is just making excuses to not aim higher. The whole
platform changes every six months and yes Linux developers are used
to the pain that comes with that. But would it hurt us to try and
make Mir one of the more stable parts o
I feel that is just making excuses to not aim higher. The whole platform
changes every six months and yes Linux developers are used to the pain
that comes with that. But would it hurt us to try and make Mir one of
the more stable parts of that platform?
On 12/08/15 08:17, Christopher James Ha
On Wed, Aug 12, 2015 at 2:08 AM, Kevin Gunn
wrote:
I tend to agree, although i am curious to hear what others think.
My hope would be that we'd be balanced about adopting "new language
variants and dependencies" - if we have reasons to do so, then do
those outweigh stagnating for the sake of b
I tend to agree, although i am curious to hear what others think.
My hope would be that we'd be balanced about adopting "new language
variants and dependencies" - if we have reasons to do so, then do those
outweigh stagnating for the sake of being able to build on older ubuntu
stables?
br,kg
On T
All,
In the past we've made decisions to adopt new language variants and
dependencies for Mir that meant only users on the latest Ubuntu release
could build the latest Mir code. And if the latest Ubuntu release means
the pre-release then we're probably excluding most Ubuntu users from
being a
11 matches
Mail list logo
