Re: Deprecating eCos 2.0

[John Dallaway <john at dallaway dot org dot uk>]

Jonathan Larmour wrote:

> Andrew Lunn wrote:
>
> > Wouldn't it be
> > better to just make a snapshot of CVS, with the CVS directories, so
> > that people can do a cvs up. Also change the documentation to
> > encourage people to do this as the last part of the installation
> > process.
>
> It's a dubious enough suggestion as it is to be making a release that 
> isn't stabilised (although at least we can fix up any real 
> showstoppers). Positively encouraging use of sources that can be 
> infrequently but occasionally seriously broken, seems even less wise.

I agree with Jifl that we need a way to readily distinguish official 
releases from CVS checkouts. Official releases cater for a different 
class of user who cares more about stability than about the very latest 
features. Of course, we need to do what we can to ensure that the next 
official release lives up to such expectations. I would support 
retaining the "v2_x" style of version directories for future releases.

Users always have the option of checking out a specific version of eCos 
from CVS using a release tag if they prefer a stable repository that can 
be updated in the future.

John Dallaway