This is the mail archive of the ecos-maintainers@sourceware.org mailing list for the eCos project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: Deprecating eCos 2.0


Andrew Lunn wrote:

We always seem to run into these problems a while after a release.

Well, we've only had one non-Red Hat release ;).


We
should think forward for the next release. Do we really want to make a
release with a different version number in the tree?

I think so yes. Normally it's reasonable to assume that if people reporting problems have packages with v2_0 in the name, it's a giveaway that it's old; and if it's "current", then not only is it from cvs, but it is likely to be recent CVS (even the snapshots via FTP are updated weekly so people can easily keep up-to-date). If we ship out stuff with "current" in the package name, there will be a marked increase in people with paths saying "current" when actually it's out of date. We want to catch when people are using old sources, and it's not hard to achieve.


Wouldn't it be
better to just make a snapshot of CVS, with the CVS directories, so
that people can do a cvs up. Also change the documentation to
encourage people to do this as the last part of the installation
process.

It's a dubious enough suggestion as it is to be making a release that isn't stabilised (although at least we can fix up any real showstoppers). Positively encouraging use of sources that can be infrequently but occasionally seriously broken, seems even less wise.


Jifl
--
------["The best things in life aren't things."]------      Opinions==mine


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]