On Dec 24, 2016 08:32, "Eric Covener" <[email protected]> wrote:
> I'm not saying we don't do one so we can do the other; I'm > saying we do both, at the same time, in parallel. I still > don't understand why that concept is such an anathema to some > people. I also worry about our ability to deliver a 3.0 with enough re-architecture for us and and function for users, vs a more continuous delivery (apologies for bringing buzzaords to dev@httpd) cadence on 2.4 as we've been in. Here is the confusion (see the versioning thread.) 2.6 is a break in ABI compatibility. 3.0 is a break in API compatibility. Size in this case doesn't matter. Any break at all merits these changes. We are not a commercial product. We are httpd. Nobody cares what the version no is other than us, they very largely install and forget, OS vendors grab new at one point in their distribution gathering phase and don't revisit. Adoption outside of OS distros is largely irrelevant. Talk about do-nothing, PCRE2 has been out a very long time with all the activity and no adoption, PCRE 8.x is on life support with little pulse and is the defacto standard. Your assumptions don't reflect the actual adoption behaviors.
