[Dovecot] Is it 1.0 yet?

[Stephen Warren]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Troy Engel wrote:
> Dan Price wrote:
>>
>> I agree except for my aformentioned concerns: if 1.0.1 is a bugfix
>> release for 1.0, great.  But I'd not like 1.0.1 to be chock full of
>> new features which could introduce instability.
>>
>> I'd like to see a risk managed, bug-fix-only 1.0.x train and a less
>> stable 1.1 or 2.x train.
> 
> I concur with Dan, 1.0.x bugfix + 1.1 devel. Stability is more key to us
> rather than new features - if it wasn't for the namespace needs I'd
> probably be using 0.99 as that's what's in the RHEL release.

I would add: Once 1.0.x is released, and new development is occuring in
1.1.x (or whatever), *please* continue to support 1.0.x for bugfixes.

The current situation is that all but the very very latest distros ship
0.99.x, and nobody can get any support for this because 1.0rc* is
around. This is a very bad situation, because the whole point of using a
distro that contains the app you want is so that you don't have to build
custom versions from source, or install RPMs/whatever from a source
outside your distro.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFF0zX3hk3bo0lNTrURAgayAJ9SvEJV7HhAvgKwvmz6os3Fb9qTpwCgsvQR
DK2FUzfr8bObegIKrRBjXe0=
=XvnB
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----