On Thu, May 15, 2014 at 03:56:29PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Two announcements for their version 0.2 on the list archive are not > quite enough to advertise them to their users.
I do not think this README nor a mention in the release notes will get their attention either, and many people (and packagers) will continue to use the stale versions forever until those versions go away. I would much rather _replace_ them with a README in the long run, and people will notice that they are gone, and then use the README to update their install procedure. For 2.0, I am hesitant to do that, though I do not have a problem with a README like this as a heads-up to prepare packagers for the future. I say hesitant because people may have been test-packaging 2.0.0-rc3 in preparation for release, and it will be annoying to them to suddenly switch. But that being said, this is Felipe's code. While we have a legal right to distribute it in v2.0, if he would really prefer it out for v2.0, I would respect that. I would prefer to instrument the code with warnings, as that is the sort of thing a packager moving from -rc3 to -final might not notice, and shipping the warnings to end users who did not package the software in the first place will not help them. It is the attention of the packagers (and source-builders) you want to get. Of course that is all just my two cents, and is mostly predicated on there _being_ packagers of the contrib/ tools. It looks like there is a Debian package in RFP status, but I don't know if that is following the new release closely. And I don't know about other systems. -Peff -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
