Wireshark · Wireshark-dev: Re: [Wireshark-dev] old wiretap-0.3.1.dll in Wireshark 1.0.2 win32installer

[Sake Blok <sake@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On Thu, Jul 24, 2008 at 02:22:33AM +0200, Anders Broman wrote:
> 
> Guy Harris wrote:
> >
> >One person's bug fix is another person's enhancement.
> >
> >If the extended format trace files are common enough or will be more  
> >common in the short term, and if the eyesdn changes aren't too  
> >complex, one could perhaps argue that the inability of Wireshark  
> >1.0[.x] to read the extended format trace files is a bug.
> >
> >(A completely *new* trace file format probably doesn't belong in  
> >1.0[.x].  An enhancement to an *existing* trace file format to handle  
> >new stuff that will show up within the lifetime of 1.0[.x] might  
> >belong in 1.0[.x].)
> 
> Which brings up the question what is the expected life time of 1.0[.x]?
> and should some (limited) enhancements go in to it?

If the life time of the 1.0[.x] release is quite long, which I think
it should, then building 1.1.x "feature" releases might be a good
thing to provide enhancements to the user community in an official
way (just like the releases pre-1.0).

Which would give the following versions:

1.[even].x      Maintenance releases (STABLE)
1.[odd].x       Feature releases
1.[odd].x-SVN#  Automated development builds

Maybe the download statistics will show a turnover point between
downloading the maintenace releases and the deature releases, which
show it's time for the next maintenance release to come out.

I thought this was the original plan, because otherwise there is no
need to stick to 1.[even].x releases since the 1.[odd].x releases 
will not be used.

Cheers,
    Sake