[zeromq-dev] Stable releases
ellisonbg at gmail.com
Mon Jun 7 16:32:20 CEST 2010
On Mon, Jun 7, 2010 at 3:30 AM, Martin Lucina <mato at kotelna.sk> wrote:
> ph at imatix.com said:
>> On Mon, Jun 7, 2010 at 12:05 AM, Martin Sustrik <sustrik at 250bpm.com> wrote:
>> > So far 0MQ was tagged as 'beta' implying it's still in development and
>> > the API/ABI may change between releases.
>> > However, it seems that the project is in a stage where people really
>> > care about stability of the API/ABI and complain when it gets changed.
>> It seems kind of confusing that as we move towards a stable release,
>> we still make last-minute changes. Sorry to all the binding
>> maintainers. We really wanted to get the API stable in this current
>> We've moved/forked the repository to https://github.com/imatix/zeromq
>> and will move the current master towards "stable". New
>> experimentation will happen on other branches or other gits.
While a bit of a pain I do think it makes sense to move the main repo
to this location in the long run.
> I am somewhat surprised that this "executive decision" has been made in the
> short space of about 12 hours since Martin Sustrik's request for comments
> on the way forward, without actually giving the contributors involved a
> chance to comment on what that way forward might be.
> As a contributor who has spent a considerable amount of time *for free*
> helping both with the actual preparation of the last few 0MQ releases, and
> helping define the release policy, I feel somewhat "left out".
> Therefore, I must ask the following questions:
> Regarding the actual change of the canonical repository, will existing
> collaborators be retained?
> Who will be maintaining this new "fork", if it is a fork, and is this
> regarded as a community project or as an iMatix project?
> What will happen to the sustrik/zeromq2 repository, which as of today has
> 129 watchers and thus is regarded by at least 129 people as the canonical
> repository for 0MQ?
> How will those 129 watchers, and other people not necessarily watching the
> mailing list for an obscure message titled "Stable release", learn about
> this change?
> Why was this change not implemented simply as the announcement of the
> creation of a v2.0-stable branch in the current repository? (This is what I
> would have recommended, but no one asked/gave me a chance to answer)
> What is the roadmap for the stabilization of the 2.0.x release?
> Regarding the
>> zeromq-dev mailing list
>> zeromq-dev at lists.zeromq.org
> zeromq-dev mailing list
> zeromq-dev at lists.zeromq.org
Brian E. Granger, Ph.D.
Assistant Professor of Physics
Cal Poly State University, San Luis Obispo
bgranger at calpoly.edu
ellisonbg at gmail.com
More information about the zeromq-dev