Alex> It seems to me that duplicating (in your example) 2.3.8 to 2.4.0
Alex> (and using 2.5.0 as the new baseline for further experimentation)
Alex> would be a very clear signal in this sense.
This is essentially the Linux kernel release model, yes? Once 2.3.8 morphs
simultaneously into 2.4.0 and 2.5.0, the 2.3.x branch dies. New development
goes into 2.5.0 and bugfixes go into both branches, as appropriate.
I think an important question is what happens to the 2.2.x branch once 2.4.0
is released? Should it die (in the sense of *never* getting another micro
release)? I think that would be a fair approach, otherwise you have an
ever-increasing support burden, trying to handle more and more releases.
Was there ever a huge clamor for 1.5.3? It seems that for many people the
heavens opened and Gabriel descended with a 1.5.2 CD. ;-)
Skip
RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue
Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo
HTML:
3.2
| Encoding:
UTF-8
| Version:
0.7.4