Parrot support policy still active?

[Patrick R. Michaud]

> So, in short, we don't really treat them substantially different. We
> did reject the deprecations part of the support policy, and using
> supported releases as a deprecation boundary was really their biggest
> purpose for a while. Without that, there isn't a "real" substantive
> difference. [...]
> 
> Just because we don't treat them any differently doesn't mean that we
> couldn't or even that we shouldn't. If Rakudo would like a particular
> behavior with respect to supported releases, we can definitely talk
> about implementing that.

Rakudo doesn't have any specific needs in this area; what we have
now is working fine.  I just wanted to know about Parrot's directions
in this area.

I also suspect that distribution packagers (e.g. Debian) will want to
have some guideline for identifying Parrot's "stable" releases that 
they should choose when preparing packages for inclusion in OS
repositories.  As it is now, I think the Debian packagers always 
choose Parrot's "supported" releases, and then pick a corresponding
Rakudo from that.

Based on your message, I'm guessing that Rakudo should always
list the "oldest workable version" of Parrot as its PARROT_REVISION.
This means that Rakudo 2012.07 may end up listing Parrot 4.4.0 as 
its "minimum version", although we'll certainly test it against
Parrot 4.6.0 when it comes out in a couple of weeks.  

Of course, if anything happens whereby we find that Rakudo/NQP 
absolutely require a Parrot newer than 4.4.0, we'll bump the next
PARROT_REVISION to 4.6.0 automatically.

Thanks!

Pm