[cmaster-next] stable/2.0 close-down

[Lou Berger]

so what should patches go against now, 2.0 or master?


On 12/7/2016 7:12 AM, Donald Sharp wrote:
> I am fine with this.  David?
>
> donald
>
> On Tue, Dec 6, 2016 at 1:47 AM, Martin Winter
> <mwinter at opensourcerouting.org> wrote:
>>
>> On 5 Dec 2016, at 7:55, David Lamparter wrote:
>>
>>> Hi everyone,
>>>
>>>
>>> I've just merged Renato's RIP & BGP cleanups, which came with a zebra
>>> namespace rework/cleanup.
>>>
>>> This was pretty much exactly at the limit of what I think was still
>>> acceptable for a "stable/" branch, but I'd like to progress clamping
>>> down on the "allowed impact" of changes.
>>>
>>> Donald & I are in agreement that, for "stable/2.0", there should be:
>>> - no new features
>> I would really like to get the needed (small) changes added to be able to
>> create snap packages.
>> Waiting for Renato on the LDP issue/question on this…
>>
>> Not sure if this is looked as as a change (and if yes: everyone ok?)
>>
>> - Martin
>>
>>
>>> - no reworks
>>> (Please voice your disagreement if you have any!)
>>>
>>> On the other hand, please *do* send:
>>> - bugfixes in general
>>> - bugfixes for regressions
>>> - build system fixes
>>> - documentation updates
>>>
>>> However, even bugfixes should hopefully get smaller and smaller now.  We
>>> need to make sure the limes converges towards a release :)
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>>
>>>
>>> -David
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> cmaster-next mailing list
>>> cmaster-next at lists.nox.tf
>>> https://lists.nox.tf/listinfo/cmaster-next
>> _______________________________________________
>> cmaster-next mailing list
>> cmaster-next at lists.nox.tf
>> https://lists.nox.tf/listinfo/cmaster-next
> _______________________________________________
> cmaster-next mailing list
> cmaster-next at lists.nox.tf
> https://lists.nox.tf/listinfo/cmaster-next