On Saturday 25 February 2012, Jeff Trawick wrote: > On Sat, Feb 25, 2012 at 1:17 PM, Graham Leggett <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hi all, > > > > Is "The 2.4.x branch is still CTR" still true? > > > > From STATUS: > > > > CURRENT RELEASE NOTES: > > > > * Forward binary compatibility is expected of Apache 2.4.x > > releases, such that no MMN major number changes will occur after > > 2.4.1. Such changes can only be made in the trunk. > > > > * All commits to branches/2.4.x must be reflected in SVN trunk, > > as well, if they apply. Logical progression is commit to > > trunk then merge into branches/2.4.x, as applicable. The 2.4.x > > branch is still CTR. > > sf asked this too IIRC, and nobody responded. It seems that 2.2 > went RTC about the same time as 2.2 was GA (r349819). Perhaps > many would feel comfortable keeping it CTR for another 2.4.x > release or so, but then we'd just have the discussion again, > possibly in reaction to a commit that someone didn't like.
I have proposed a middle ground in my other mail. I think it is useful to keep CTR for simple fixes like these: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=revision&revision=1293405 http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=revision&revision=1293708 http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=revision&revision=1293535 > > RTC now: > > +1: trawick (as much to get the conversation over with as anything > else ;) ) RTC now as default, but keep CTR until the next 2.4.x release for bug fixes that are not complex or invasive and don't change any API: +1: sf
