-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 25
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Nim version #1011
Comments
I am trying to use the 2.0.12 version because it is not too big a jump (compared to 2.2.2). Moreover, the Nimbus build system switched to it one month ago, and this is the last patched version for 2.0.x. But I am worried about Constantine, which dropped support for 1.6.12 and 2.0.x because it wasn't compiling... They still have a statement:
So I will try with 2.0.12, and we will see... |
I think only 2.2.x were considered stable enough to make the jump. Can we confirm this with the nimbus team? |
Tagging @arnetheduck for some insights. |
Nimbus (and waku) use 2.0.x for now, with Regarding 2.2, if something works there but not in 2.0 and this is due to a bugfix (rather than some new feature), we usually investigate and negotiate a backport of the fix and a new 2.0.x release (I recommend all teams contribute to this process). The easiest way to do this is to report which bugfix needs backporting in the nim issue tracker. |
Nim v2.2.0 still has many issues which are fixed in v2.0.12 thanks to backports from
This is because https://github.com/nim-lang/Nim/commits/version-2-2/ has not been updated in 2 months, while Similarly, as a result of this lack of activity in the So, yes, it indeed has not gone through the QA process. Going from v2.0.12 to v2.2.0 is a very lateral move at this point, with the downside of not being consistent with the rest of IFT. The combination of known regressions in 2.2.0 vs 2.0.12 and the lack of any visible plan or schedule on which they might be fixed would encourage usage of v2.0.12 and updated v2.0.x versions until that situation is clarified. I'd like to migrate Nimbus to v2.2.x when it's reasonable, but so far it does not look practical or reasonable.
Indeed, and hopefully having identified one reason @mratsim dropped v2.0.x, we can get a backport for at least that much. |
Thanks! That clarifies it. @2-towns lets stick with the latest 2.0.x. |
No description provided.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: