[request-tracker-maintainers] 4.2?

[Dominic Hargreaves]

[fixing quoting]

> On Fri, Nov 29, 2013 at 3:12 PM, Kai Storbeck <kai at xs4all.nl> wrote:
> > On 11/11/13 00:55, Dominic Hargreaves wrote:
> >> On Sat, Nov 09, 2013 at 08:48:32PM -0600, Matt Zagrabelny wrote:
> >>> Is there an ETA for packaging 4.2?
> >>
> >> I started work on it but I am unlikely to be able to get it to a point
> >> of release this side of Christmas owing to other commitments.
> >
> > Hello,
> >
> >
> >> If anyone would like to pick up from where I currently am let me know
> >> and I can push my work in progress and give some idea of the things that
> >> need doing.
> >
> > I might be able to help with a few things. I'm interested to know what
> > needs to be done.

On Mon, Dec 02, 2013 at 02:04:44PM -0600, Matt Zagrabelny wrote:
> I'd be interested in looking at the packaging too, if it isn't too much trouble.

Hi all,

Sorry about going silent again - I became inundated with other tasks
during the last few months.

I am just about to upload RT 4.0.18, and should be able to start on 4.2
quite soon. I need to go back and look at the early work I did, and
probably redo it on top of 4.0.18 and with 4.2.1, then I should be able
to get together some issues to be looked at.

The big question in my mind is about whether we need to rename the
package to request-tracker4.2. I'd prefer not to because it's more
work both for the package maintainer and for users, but there are couple
of reasons for doing so:

* API incompatibilty for extensions? Need to check upstream
* Allow coinstallability for testing upgrades (not a particularly
  compelling reason; testing should probably be done on another host
  anyway)
* Giving the users the choice of 4.0 or 4.2 whilst both are maintained
  upstream. This would mean that RT 4.2 could hit unstable sooner.

What do others think?

Dominic.