--- In firebird-support@yahoogroups.com, Helen Borrie <helebor@...> wrote:

>
> At 03:16 PM 28/12/2008, Adam wrote:
>
> >It took us 12 months to trace, remove or rewrite code that the 2.x or
> >2.1 engine finds ambiguous, or chooses a plan less optimal than the
> >1.5 series. Granted this was not a goal we gave special focus to, but
> >it is only last month we could actually claim full support for 2.1.x.
> >
> >We were able to move through the point releases of 1.5 with targeted
> >testing within a week of release and with no code changes from our
> >side. It takes a lot more effort to migrate to a new major version,
> >arrange for acceptance tests and then perform upgrades for hundreds of
> >customers.
> >
> >I doubt that releasing security fixes for old versions significantly
> >delays new versions of Firebird. I imagine it would be the same
> >changes made in different branches.
>
> You might be surprised. Each patch release takes developer

resources, build resources (multi-platform, multi-architecture), QA
resources, documentation resources, web resources. So - try not to
trivialise what it takes to get Firebird releases and patch releases
out there to keep you all safe and happy.

I was not attempting to trivialise the hard work from all departments.
There is a lot of obvious (ie. publicly visible) work in doing this,
and there is significant additional behind the scenes work that we are
not aware of.

But it is silly to assume that progress in a current branch is at a
stand still because the project is too busy chasing its tail patching
"old" releases. Anyone who has read the release notes will see quite a
blistering pace. I suppose half the "customers" want the old versions
supported forever and the other half want the entire focus dedicated
to [insert requested feature scheduled for some future release]. It is
always an impossible goal to please anyone.

Anyhow, wishing everyone a happy and safe holiday season.

Adam