2016-07-06 12:01 GMT+08:00 James Baker cycle.code.media@gmail.com:
LTS is a great idea but its also a fair amount of work so my humble opinion would be to go for a much more recent release and work out any stability issues that you may have from there which as Adam suggests could also benefit the users who track releases as well, doesn't make a lot of sense to start an LTS release now using a years old release of Gambit.
Maybe two make sense, a very recent one *and* 4.7.X?
4.7.X is not *so* old, and it works so well already, so from a short-term risk point of view it makes a lot of sense to work with. But sure I totally see your point.
Personally I'd hate to see Marc get tied up managing LTS branches rather than pushing Gambit in new and exciting directions.
Totally.
I think for now I'd vote for two, like this. An LTE can always be discontinued or less maintained in the future. An awareness should build up fairly quickly about their pros/cons.
Also of course there are certain bugs that will not go away, e.g. the non-collectin of manually trigged testators - because it's relatively deep in the GC. Those bugs should simply be listed for the individual LTE.
Maybe the "___result()" macro should be brought to the LTE as it solves something.
Maybe the new unit tests and compile scripts for platforms should be moved in to the LTE for safety and platform completeness, which is pretty close to the "bug fixing" definition.
This altogether does not look like a whole lot of work to me -
I guess Marc may need to review and accept the pull requests to the LTE:s, that would be about as much as he needs to do.
Thoughts?
And a next step would be, exactly which 4.7.X commit should be chosen, and which recent commit?