On Fri, Apr 16, 2010 at 1:00 PM, Robert Muir <rcm...@gmail.com> wrote:
> And I think backwards compatibility should be more community-driven instead > of a "policy". If no one wants to put things in a stable branch I really do > think thats a sign of something (mostly that its not as important as you seem > to think) I also suspect many devs will want to work on the stable branch, because the changes are released much more frequently. Ie, we should in general cut a 3.1, 3.2, 3.3, etc. much sooner than a 4.0. I think the default should be that a new feature is done on the stable branch unless it's going to break APIs / require too much work for back compat. It'd be a judgement call on each feature, and we'll obviously have to see how things pan out over time, but I would expect alot of work happens on the stable branch... Mike --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org
