-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 5.4k
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Is there a policy about backporting new functions to LTS? #51534
Comments
In general, we don't backport features unless we have a really good reason to. |
Yes, I thought so. Why I think backporting Libc.mkfifo soon to 1.10 would be wise before it gets to be an LTS. I however don't see a huge reason to not allow backporting selectively after LTS. I'm asking to know how urgent backporting is, in case we have a policy against backporting to LTSes. |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
I did see for new Libc.mkfifo for 1.11, not 1.10:
https://github.com/JuliaLang/julia/pull/34587/files
hardlink would also be helpful for 1.10 (or 1.6) LTS. I'm not sure why it was there in the NEWS, since it was seemingly added in 1.8.
People have done without Libc.mkfifo for a long time, so maybe it doesn't need to be backported, but it's still useful, and I don't see a reason to now backport it to 1.10. It's very localized and shouldn't accidentally break previous stuff.
1.10 is not yet LTS, I'm just thinking, in case if were so already about if allowed. Is there a (documented) policy (for or) against, forbidding backporting?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: