Hi Paul, On Sun, Aug 17, 2008 at 6:09 PM, Paul Melis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Just a quick question: what about a 2.4 maintenance series, as that was the > original incentive for a maintenance branch? I understand that now 2.6 is > out we should focus maintenance on that series, but it seemed there was some > interest in a maintained 2.4 series as well.
Which versions you maintain is up I'll leave up to you guys. I'd guess it'll depend upon other packages that use the OSG as well. For instance is a major program uses 2.0, 2.2, or 2.4 as it's base then the developers should raise their hands and request, if not better help maintain it as well. Practicality wise I think it'd be good to have developers who specifically require a certain branch to help maintain it as they have direct need to make sure it work well. This would also help the maintenance crew scale to fit the needs of the community. Having a maintain crew really does open the door up to maintaining the stable releases, which is a great step forward - I simply haven't had the time nor intellectual bandwidth to cope with this. The intellectual bandwidth part is a big one, as trying to remember the current state of play with just svn/trunk is challenging enough - remembering the state of play of all stable releases before it without confusion is well beyond my allotted grey matter can cope with. I have 2.6 still fresh in my mind, but have begun to move on to looking towards VPB 1.0 and OSG 2.7.x series so thought it best to raise the topic maintenance before 2.6 gets swapped out of my cache. I'll be making 2.7.0 this morning, and when I do this I'll post the ChangeLog since 2.6 so the maintenance crew can review what could be pulled across to the 2.6 branch. Personally I'd be happy for everything to go across. Robert. _______________________________________________ osg-users mailing list osg-users@lists.openscenegraph.org http://lists.openscenegraph.org/listinfo.cgi/osg-users-openscenegraph.org
