[IronPython] IronPython 2.6 RC 1 Release Hidden
Keith J. Farmer
kfarmer at thuban.org
Tue Nov 10 12:29:48 PST 2009
As for the question at hand, though :)
I'm not in blanket agreement here. I'd agree for some releases to be valid dependency points, but things like RCs, betas, obsoleted third-level versions -- not really.
In the first two cases, those are bleeding-edge releases. If you take a dependency on them, expect to bleed.
In the latter case, I wouldn't expect API differences, or other breaking changes unless they represented critical bug fixes. Again, I wouldn't want to support a dependency upon something horribly broken.
In light of the above, then, I'd propose keeping the following versions:
and strongly consider keeping:
From: users-bounces at lists.ironpython.com on behalf of Michael Foord
Sent: Tue 11/10/2009 11:25 AM
To: Discussion of IronPython
Subject: Re: [IronPython] IronPython 2.6 RC 1 Release Hidden
Keith J. Farmer wrote:
> "making releases that people / projects may have depended on is an unacceptable cost"
> You wanna rephrase that there, Michael? :)
making unavailable releases that people....
> -----Original Message-----
> From: users-bounces at lists.ironpython.com [mailto:users-bounces at lists.ironpython.com] On Behalf Of Michael Foord
> Sent: Monday, November 09, 2009 1:47 AM
> To: Discussion of IronPython
> Subject: Re: [IronPython] IronPython 2.6 RC 1 Release Hidden
> Jimmy Schementi wrote:
>> I agree, but I think the desire it to keep that "Releases" list clean. Otherwise it would have every release ever in there. It's a CodePlex limitation that there is no way to hide those releases from that list, while still keeping the links active.
> I understand the motivation, but making releases that people / projects
> may have depended on is an unacceptable cost in my opinion.
> Users mailing list
> Users at lists.ironpython.com
Users mailing list
Users at lists.ironpython.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Users