From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 3447 invoked from network); 12 Nov 2003 10:32:36 -0000 Received: from sunsite.dk (130.225.247.90) by ns1.primenet.com.au with SMTP; 12 Nov 2003 10:32:36 -0000 Received: (qmail 11786 invoked by alias); 12 Nov 2003 10:32:27 -0000 Mailing-List: contact zsh-workers-help@sunsite.dk; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk X-No-Archive: yes X-Seq: 19240 Received: (qmail 11771 invoked from network); 12 Nov 2003 10:32:27 -0000 Received: from localhost (HELO sunsite.dk) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 12 Nov 2003 10:32:27 -0000 X-MessageWall-Score: 0 (sunsite.dk) Received: from [62.189.183.235] by sunsite.dk (MessageWall 1.0.8) with SMTP; 12 Nov 2003 10:32:26 -0000 Received: from EXCHANGE02.csr.com (unverified) by MAILSWEEPER01.csr.com (Content Technologies SMTPRS 4.3.10) with ESMTP id for ; Wed, 12 Nov 2003 10:32:23 +0000 Received: from csr.com ([192.168.144.127]) by EXCHANGE02.csr.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.5329); Wed, 12 Nov 2003 10:33:25 +0000 To: Zsh Workers Subject: Re: Status of 4.1.x branch? In-reply-to: "Danek Duvall"'s message of "Tue, 11 Nov 2003 13:30:10 PST." <20031111213010.GB28125@lorien.emufarm.org> Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2003 10:32:20 +0000 Message-ID: <27681.1068633140@csr.com> From: Peter Stephenson X-OriginalArrivalTime: 12 Nov 2003 10:33:25.0930 (UTC) FILETIME=[679730A0:01C3A908] Danek Duvall wrote: > What's the status on a follow-on to 4.1.1? I'm thinking of pushing for > 4.1.1 to be integrated into Solaris (to replace 3.0.6 or whatever's > there currently), because it seems stable enough to be a win over 4.0.x, > but if there's going to be a new release soon, then I'd like to sit on > it until then. (If there's a concern that 4.1.x isn't stable enough yet > for such a release, then I can push for 4.0.7 instead.) I think you're (both) right; 4.1 is probably as stable as 4.0, plus gets more testing from the people writing the internals. I've been hoping for improvements in the parameter area, plus at least some basic support for UTF-8, but there hasn't been anyone to work on that. I've been planning a maintainance release of both, but it may be time to dump the fiction that 4.1 is unstable and release 4.2.0 instead. We might as well release a 4.0.8 as a final 4.0 for anyone who's happy with that line. I'm still not completely happy with the termcap and terminfo modules, they still seem to be the source of compatibility problems despite a lot of effort to make them portable. Plea: We really need someone to do the work making sure all relevant patches are applied to 4.0. It's unlikely I'll have time to do it thoroughly even given lists of potential patches. -- Peter Stephenson Software Engineer CSR Ltd., Science Park, Milton Road, Cambridge, CB4 0WH, UK Tel: +44 (0)1223 692070 ********************************************************************** This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify the system manager. This footnote also confirms that this email message has been swept by MIMEsweeper for the presence of computer viruses. www.mimesweeper.com **********************************************************************