My opinion (fwiw): i agree with Alex that the tag shouldn't be unpushed. Last time this happened caused some headaches for me personally so maybe I'm biased 😅
I'd hold off on revving for the changelog too: Alex and I have chatted a bit and I think we'd both like to get this project to a point where the release process is more streamlined, and easier to accomplish on a more regular cadence. So, maybe this changelog thing can provide some motivation to get to that 1.4.1 release El jue, 27 de oct de 2022, 11:23 p. m., Alex Chernyakhovsky < [email protected]> escribió: > I don't think we should un-push the tag. I also don't think it's worth > rev'ing the version over the changelog? But I'd definitely rev the version > if we think we need to include it. > > Sincerely, > -Alex > > On Thu, Oct 27, 2022, 10:42 PM Keith Winstein <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> Thanks Ben. I didn't realize we had pushed an unsigned tag already. I >> guess... my tentative thought would be let's un-push the "mosh-1.4.0" tag >> since I'd rather maintain past practice and have that be a signed tag >> anyway. Unless you think this will cause lots of problems (but I don't >> think it will). I don't think we need to rev the version number unless you >> do. >> >> And then I think sure, please do what you think is right with the >> ChangeLog and the debian/changelog however you prefer, and then I can tag >> and sign that and we can cut the source tarball from there. Sorry for the >> last-minute friction here. >> >> -Keith >> >> On Thu, Oct 27, 2022 at 7:14 PM Benjamin Barenblat <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >>> On Wednesday, October 26, 2022, at 8:33 PM -0700, Keith Winstein wrote: >>> > (1) Should we update the ChangeLog file for the source release? It >>> looks >>> > like you (and achin?) already wrote text for it. >>> >>> I completely forgot about the changelog. Yes, we should update that. >>> What do you think – should we update the changelog and push a 1.4.1 tag, >>> or should we update the changelog and replace the existing 1.4.0 tag >>> with a new one that includes the changelog update? >>> >>> > (2) Should I make the final 1.4.0 debian/changelog entry (probably >>> > including the same bullet points as we'll put into ChangeLog) or do you >>> > want to make a PR for that? >>> >>> I can take care of the Debian work. Debian generally prefers to keep >>> upstream changelog entries out of debian/changelog – debian/changelog is >>> supposed to be a changelog for the packaging, not the package. But I’ll >>> make sure the Mosh changelog is included in /usr/share/doc/mosh. >>> >>> > (3) In the past the release announcement email named/credited the >>> "primary >>> > developer and release manager" -- what do you want it to say this time? >>> > (I.e who should be credited and in what order?) >>> >>> For developers, it looks like cgull, Anders, Alex, and I all contributed >>> over 100 lines of diff to Mosh since the last release. It’s an arbitrary >>> cutoff, but it seems as good as any to me. I think cgull should probably >>> go first on the list, since they were making active contributions until >>> 2021. >>> >>> As for release manager, I think that’s Alex. He was definitely the >>> forcing function here. :) >>> >> _______________________________________________ > mosh-devel mailing list > [email protected] > https://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/mosh-devel >
_______________________________________________ mosh-devel mailing list [email protected] https://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/mosh-devel
