On Wed, 18 May 2011, Chris Travers wrote:
On Wed, May 18, 2011 at 10:19 PM, Luke <..hidden..> wrote:On Wed, 18 May 2011, Chris Travers wrote:probably a good idea to find a mode where releases get only big enough to address a small number of specific issues (and the regular bug fixes) on the point releases. That might satisfy only a small group of current users, but the continued development could easily attract new users too. That would be a net benefit.Question: How should we look at getting rid of the old code, post 1.3?Why not start phasing out (by rewriting) SL/old code, during the sub-releases of 1.3?Eek. that means replacing 1000+ line files in the middle of a stable branch..... Not really thrilled about that even if we reconsider the
Well then, my answer is: do nothing.When the major version after 1.3 happens, don't reuse legacy code. Most of it would have to change anyway, so start from scratch unless you decide instead to do a 1.4.
policy on feature freezes and I'd object to that because I think it is important that people be able to get bugfix-only releases.
You think that, but do your people?:) I personally don't think the project is mature enough to support the policy. It's one thing in the case of, say, Drupal, where most "features" are provided modularly; and the only thing to contrast it with is the previous, worse, major version; but here, with the loss of features that existed in the parent version, it doesn't seem wise. (I'm taking John's word about stuff that's missing, as the last time I tried to install 1.3 was quite a long time ago)
Luke