From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.org/gmane.linux.lib.musl.general/5209 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Natanael Copa Newsgroups: gmane.linux.lib.musl.general Subject: Re: musl 1.0.x branch Date: Mon, 9 Jun 2014 11:23:52 +0200 Message-ID: <20140609112352.1e7ad51e@ncopa-desktop.alpinelinux.org> References: <20140606175617.GA3914@brightrain.aerifal.cx> Reply-To: musl@lists.openwall.com NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1402305859 23229 80.91.229.3 (9 Jun 2014 09:24:19 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 9 Jun 2014 09:24:19 +0000 (UTC) Cc: musl@lists.openwall.com To: Rich Felker Original-X-From: musl-return-5214-gllmg-musl=m.gmane.org@lists.openwall.com Mon Jun 09 11:24:13 2014 Return-path: Envelope-to: gllmg-musl@plane.gmane.org Original-Received: from mother.openwall.net ([195.42.179.200]) by plane.gmane.org with smtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1WtvoK-0004lr-2m for gllmg-musl@plane.gmane.org; Mon, 09 Jun 2014 11:24:12 +0200 Original-Received: (qmail 7380 invoked by uid 550); 9 Jun 2014 09:24:10 -0000 Mailing-List: contact musl-help@lists.openwall.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: Original-Received: (qmail 7372 invoked from network); 9 Jun 2014 09:24:10 -0000 In-Reply-To: <20140606175617.GA3914@brightrain.aerifal.cx> X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.10.0 (GTK+ 2.24.23; x86_64-alpine-linux-musl) Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.linux.lib.musl.general:5209 Archived-At: On Fri, 6 Jun 2014 13:56:17 -0400 Rich Felker wrote: > I'm about to prepare the 1.0.3 release, and I've been thinking a bit > about the future of the 1.0.x branch. Specifically I'd like to gauge > the extent to which it's being used. So far cherry-picking fixes to it > has been pretty easy, but it's an extra task to keep up with, and the > cherry-picking is probably going to turn into active backporting > somewhere in the near future as the rs-1.0 and master branches > continue to diverge. > > If I don't hear back that there's significant use of the 1.0.x > releases by multiple projects, I'll probably plan to discontinue them > in the next 4 to 6 months, and in the mean time, to release only when > there are serious bugs (as opposed to releasing alongside every 1.1.x > release). Does this sound reasonable? Yes. I guess you could just drop 1.0.x support now and consider re-open it if you get complains. > If anyone's using 1.0.x not for the sake of stability but because it > works better in some way for your setup (e.g. size, performance, > application compatibility, etc.) please let me know about that too so > we can see if there's a reasonable way to make 1.1.x work just as well > for you. Alpine Linux appreciate the idea of stable/maintenance branches, but we figured that we'd be better off with the 1.1.x for out 3.0 stable release. (which is kinda beta anyways). We need the new features. So no interest in 1.0.x branch for Alpine Linux. > > Rich -nc