Re: Status of revivesa

[christos%astron.com@localhost (Christos Zoulas)]

In article <080926203412.M0127811%mirage.ceres.dti.ne.jp@localhost>,
Izumi Tsutsui  <tsutsui%ceres.dti.ne.jp@localhost> wrote:
>martin%duskware.de@localhost wrote:
>
>> We can discuss this issue ad infinitum, but AFAIK noone offered an
>> alternative solution for binary compatibility at the level we always offered
>> yet
>
>I wonder if the binary compatibility for pthread is
>a serious showstopper, i.e. it's really more important
>than other new features like MPsafe syscalls or
>WAPBL etc. for most ordinary users.
>
>Can't we defer revivesa to 5.1, as fixsa on 4.1?
>Users who actually need working SA support could use
>(forthcomming) 4.1 with fixsa and I guess there are
>quite few such users.

Once you release 5.0 without revive-sa you have screwed the users
who want to upgrade from 4.x to 5.0. Adding it to 5.1 or announcing
that you are going to add it in 5.1 wil just hurt the adoption of
5.0 or just hurt the users who will not wait.

christos