Re: musl 1.0.x branch

[Oliver Schneider <musl-mailinglist@f-prot.com>]

Hi Rich,

On 2014-06-11 13:16, Rich Felker wrote:
> For reference (I'm not sure this is published anywhere; it probably
> should be) "stable" here means "no unnecessary changes that risk
> disturbing an existing working deployment". It's not a matter of how
> reliable or bug-free the release is.
Well that's clear. Since we cannot reliably know how many defects exist
in a software project.

> My intended audience for stable is users who have fairly constant sets
> of packages built against musl and who don't want to deal with changes
> that might affect their build procedures, nonstandard or undocumented
> behaviors their programs might be relying on, etc. The release series
> from master (currently 1.1.x) on the other hand is probably a better
> choice if you're expanding your set of software built against musl,
> aiming to support a widening range of kernel versions, etc.
Indeed. Then I should probably switch to the newer release series.

Perhaps this is worth pointing out? Is there a Wiki in which one can get
edit rights so as to write these things down for future users?

With best regards,

// Oliver