Carsten Ziegeler wrote:
Ralph Goers wrote:
The folks who are decided to maintain their blocks this way did it with
the clear understanding that this was the price they would have to pay,
so I don't think the clarification is necessary. I can recall at least
one instance where a change to one of these blocks had to be backed or
modified because it broke the 2.1.x branch. Remember, we voted a while
ago for trunk to only support 1.4 and up while 2.1.x supports 1.3, so
this problem already exists.
Yepp, and I think as soon as we have 2.2 out, we should not share these
blocks with 2.1.x anymore as all new features should go to 2.2 only.
2.1.x is then a real maintenance branch where we only do minor
improvements and bugfixing.
Cool, thanks guys for the clarification. My +1 stands then. :-)
