Bazaar 2.6.0 for Windows?

[Joshua Judson Rosen]

On 2013-11-01 12:47, Chris Hecker wrote:
>
> On Nov 1, 2013 9:07 AM, "Matthias Kluwe" <mkluwe at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > Jelmer Vernooij <jelmer <at> samba.org> writes:
> > >
> > > 2.6 had a number of bug fixes, but introduced no major speed improvements or
> > > new features. Do you actually need 2.6.0 (because it fixes a particular bug
> > > you're hitting), or would 2.5.1 suffice as well?
> >
> > My main concern (apart from the fact that I *like* updating...) is that it
> > looks wierd not offering the latest release on the download page -- the
> > Windows download is mentioned *first* on http://bazaar.canonical.com/en/ ...
>
> Yeah, I agree, it just looks bad that there isn't a windows installer on the
> site for the latest.

Well, it's a seed for some conversations that I'm sure people would rather just 
not have:

     "How come we're running 2.6 on Linux and Mac OS but an old 2.5 release on 
Windows?"

     "2.6 is all bug-fixes? Why are we using an old version with known bugs?"

     "This is the first-round 2.6 *beta*. Does it work? If it works, why is it
      still marked as a *beta*?"

The idea of `working with an old version that's probably OK until we run into
a bug and find out that it's not' is a little bit of a scary proposition--
especially for someone looking at the prospect of changing from another
VC system, or someone trying to change _someone else_ from another VC system.

Actually, those conversations might be a lot more straightforward if I knew
that I could say "2.6.0 is in fact identical to 2.6b1, except for the 
version-string".
I guess it isn't, though--since there was later a 2.6b2 with 17 bugs targeted at it,
and then 2.6.0 had another 16 bugs targeted at it.

I guess I what I could say, if anyone asks me, is: I _have_ been using 2.5.1
on Ubuntu for the past 18 months without any significant issues, and I've reviewed
the list of bugs fixed between 2.5.1 and 2.6.0, and it doesn't look like there's
anything anywhere near as bad as the old `someone tried to push a merge into
an svn repository and now everything is broken' bug. Except that I haven't
actually done that bug-review yet ;)

So, yeah. I guess the specific Windows user I'm looking at converting right now
would probably be fine with either 2.5.1 or 2.6b2; I'll look through the
list of post-2.5.1 bugs and come up with something more specific.

-- 
"'tis an ill wind that blows no minds."