Hi Joel, On Thu, Feb 11, 2021 at 12:30 PM Joel Sherrill <j...@rtems.org> wrote: > > Hi > > Phillip Smith pinged me at the FSW via Slack about this set of patches he > proposed be added to the 4.10 branch. > > https://lists.rtems.org/pipermail/devel/2019-April/025610.html > > I assume this matches what their project requires. Given that 4.10 is the > last unirprocessor version and we appear to be recommending 5 over 4.11, I > suggest we consider applying the patches and discuss the possibility of > another release. [1] > > I've previously suggested treating 4.10 as a long-term version since it is > the last uniprocessor version and a good baseline for behavior, performance, > and size. > I've agreed with that view, and in fact we do have several (20+?) patches that have been pushed on top of 4.10.2 (including some that broke internal APIs such as my PIP improvements). So, these patches can be considered for sure for a 4.10.3 cut. But we need to marshal time and resources to make it happen. I'm willing to contribute as I am able to do so.
> [1] Yes I know release cutting is thankless unpaid work. First step is just > applying patches. If I remember the discussion right, we came to the conclusion that maintaining 4.10 would require more resources than we have available to commit. I would suggest we identify what the costs may be (hardware, labor) for a long-term stable 4.10 version, and target some fundraising toward users that would benefit from it. I guess there may be at least some space and EPICS users that might be interested. > > Thoughts? > > --joel > _______________________________________________ > devel mailing list > devel@rtems.org > http://lists.rtems.org/mailman/listinfo/devel _______________________________________________ devel mailing list devel@rtems.org http://lists.rtems.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
