From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 1333 invoked by alias); 30 Mar 2009 09:43:11 -0000 Received: (qmail 1324 invoked by uid 22791); 30 Mar 2009 09:43:10 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.2 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mtaout03-winn.ispmail.ntl.com (HELO mtaout03-winn.ispmail.ntl.com) (81.103.221.49) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Mon, 30 Mar 2009 09:43:06 +0000 Received: from aamtaout03-winn.ispmail.ntl.com ([81.103.221.35]) by mtaout03-winn.ispmail.ntl.com (InterMail vM.7.08.04.00 201-2186-134-20080326) with ESMTP id <20090330094303.OTPY7670.mtaout03-winn.ispmail.ntl.com@aamtaout03-winn.ispmail.ntl.com> for ; Mon, 30 Mar 2009 10:43:03 +0100 Received: from cog.dallaway.org.uk ([86.9.207.237]) by aamtaout03-winn.ispmail.ntl.com (InterMail vG.2.02.00.01 201-2161-120-102-20060912) with ESMTP id <20090330094303.MRBE2093.aamtaout03-winn.ispmail.ntl.com@cog.dallaway.org.uk> for ; Mon, 30 Mar 2009 10:43:03 +0100 Received: from cog.dallaway.org.uk (cog.dallaway.org.uk [127.0.0.1]) by cog.dallaway.org.uk (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id n2U9h11c015146 for ; Mon, 30 Mar 2009 10:43:01 +0100 Message-ID: <49D09425.2040102@dallaway.org.uk> Date: Mon, 30 Mar 2009 09:43:00 -0000 From: John Dallaway User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.19 (X11/20090107) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: eCos Maintainers Subject: Re: eCos 3.0 branch frozen References: <49CC8C74.50302@dallaway.org.uk> In-Reply-To: <49CC8C74.50302@dallaway.org.uk> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact ecos-maintainers-help@ecos.sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: ecos-maintainers-owner@ecos.sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2009-03/txt/msg00016.txt.bz2 John Dallaway wrote: > The eCos 3.0 branch is now frozen until further notice for release > engineering. Now tagged "ecos-v3_0-release" and unfrozen. We need to agree policy on maintaining the 3.0 branch. In the unlikely event of a major issue arising which demands a re-spin, this would clearly be made from the 3.0 branch. Otherwise, I would suggest that we avoid the branch and focus our on-going activities on the repository trunk as we did following the 2.0 release. John Dallaway