dann frazier wrote: > If for no other reason, upstream release process changes will likely > make this much more difficult. As I'm sure you know, 2.6 is being > actively developed indefinitely, as opposed to the previous method of > branching off and stabalising a development tree. Since there is no > existing plan for a 2.8, 2.4 would need to be maintained indefinitely > to continue a major + major-1 support model.
Sure, I think there's something to the point someone else made in this thread that each 2.6.x is essentially a new major version now. Although clearly not quite the same as before. -- see shy jo
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
