Am 17.01.2014 06:34, schrieb Benjamin Peterson:
On Thu, Jan 16, 2014, at 06:03 PM, Kristján Valur Jónsson wrote:
I never got the impression that this was a matter of funding, Nick. And while I completely understand that core developers enjoy working in 3 much more, it was decided to not accept any improvements for a +2.7 version even from those that would do so voluntarily. This could have be done without making any commitment to release a 2.8 at any point. This is why I drew the comparison. There are barriers put in place to try to achieve a social engineering result.
It's not a matter of simply accepting any improvements for 2.7 even from volunteers. If 2.8 happened, among other things people would have to
- make releases (building installers, etc)
- review new features
- triage bugs
- fix bugs in new features
- maintain yet another branch
It would surely add overhead for everyone.
Especially since "accept improvements" means making sure the end product is of the same quality as 2.7 was.
Georg