I think that bumping the version to 7 is reasonable if you're making core engine changes. +1 from me.
On Fri, Aug 24, 2012 at 5:27 AM, Rainer Gerhards <rgerha...@hq.adiscon.com>wrote: > Hi all, > > quick question, full facts and reasoning are in my other posts from today: > > we are heading toward major core engine changes (full hierarchy support as > a trigger). I am very tempted to kick this off as v7 of rsyslog, so that v6 > with a decently stable engine can be used by those just interested in > traditional feature set but improved config language. > > Any objections against this? Does it cause problems for anyone? Folks > interested in lumberjack functionality could upgrade to v7 without any > loss, probably simply skipping v6. > > Note that this split means a bit more work for me, as the v6 config > language is not yet fully implemented. But I would be OK with accepting > that work as I think it benefits the user base. > > Feedback appreciated. > > Rainer > _______________________________________________ > rsyslog mailing list > http://lists.adiscon.net/mailman/listinfo/rsyslog > http://www.rsyslog.com/professional-services/ > What's up with rsyslog? Follow https://twitter.com/rgerhards > _______________________________________________ rsyslog mailing list http://lists.adiscon.net/mailman/listinfo/rsyslog http://www.rsyslog.com/professional-services/ What's up with rsyslog? Follow https://twitter.com/rgerhards
