Re: New arch branch: mainline

[Rob Browning]

Andreas Rottmann <address@hidden> writes:

> The API breaking changes (mainly dynamic wrappers and GOOPS support)
> are only in the --rotty--0.2 branch now. Until I hear a comment from
> Rob wrt to his release plans, I will continue to make the more
> invasive changes to this branch. If Rob stays silent, I seriously
> consider starting an unstable release series (named something like
> g-wrap-1.5.X, perhaps with an -rotty suffix). Wingo, what do you
> think?
>
> [0] http://stud3.tuwien.ac.at/~e9926584/arch/2003-main

FWIW I'm back, and I've finished restoring my access to savannah now
that it's back too.  If all goes to plan, I'll be spending much of
tomorrow catching up on g-wrap and guile related work (now that the
holiday distractions are more or less over).

I agree that bug-fixes releases for 1.3.X are a good idea, and I may
focus on your changes there first.  If I recall right, we also still
need to figure out the guile version soname issues, but I need to look
back at our last exchange.  In any case, I still don't have a good
grasp on arch so that I can interact with your repository, but that's
first on my list for tomorrow.

BTW, why 1.5.X rather than 1.4 (or 1.6) for the next major release?
I'd be tempted to switch to the linux kernel versioning scheme unless
we have a good reason not to.  Though depending on just how different
the next major release is, it might even be worth considering a bump
to the major number, i.e. a 2.0.X designation.

-- 
Rob Browning
rlb @defaultvalue.org and @debian.org; previously @cs.utexas.edu
GPG starting 2002-11-03 = 14DD 432F AE39 534D B592  F9A0 25C8 D377 8C7E 73A4