On Wed, 2017-04-05 at 08:11 -0500, William A Rowe Jr wrote:

> > Maybe we should reconsider the whole idea of timedlocks??
> 
> Without throwing them out wholesale, in the interest of other 1.6.0
> enhancements, is it reasonable to keep developing this on 2.0-dev
> trunk, and back it out entirely from 1.6.x branch for now?

Howbout a --with-experimental-timedlocks config option ?

>  (Not sure
> if forking 1.7.x from 1.6.x and then backing out from 1.6.x is the
> simplest way to make that happen, but guessing it is.)

Please, no 1.7 until 1.6-release is out of the door!

We can then decide whether a 1.7 is needed, or whether the
future can be 2.0 and bugfixes.

-- 
Nick Kew

Reply via email to