On Mar 7, 2010, at 5:07 AM, Dr. David Kirkby wrote:
Robert Bradshaw wrote:
On Mar 6, 2010, at 4:50 PM, Dr. David Kirkby wrote:
I thought there was going to be a 4.4 stabilisation release, but
if I create a new trac ticket, I'm given the milestone options are
4.3.4 and 4.5 - there is no 4.4 choice.
IMHO, it would be good if the stabilisation release did go ahead,
and *only* bug-fixes were permitted. i.e. no new code to add
functionality - just to fix pre-existing bugs.
Whenever you add code, you risk introducing bugs. For the most
stable possible release, it makes sence to hold off any
enhancements until 4.5
IIRC, after viewing the nature of most annoying bugs in that
thread, it was decided they were not fit for a stabilization release.
- Robert
I was not aware of that. I think it is a real shame.
In my personal opinion, a decent stabilisation release could be
achieved by everyone submitting just bug fixes.
Yep. The problem is that this involves telling everyone what to do.
William said the other week that Sage had got more buggy recently.
Therefore it would seen sensible to me to have this release, even if
the list of bugs submitted does not fall onto anyone's "most
annoying" list.
If each developer could clear up just two bugs, without introducing
any more (i.e. there were no new features), then Sage would probably
have a couple of hundred less bugs than it has now.
Having a rule that
* Now updates to standard packages (since these often introduce as
many problems as they solve)
* Only bug fixes - no enhancements.
then IMHO, we could stabilise Sage somewhat.
Those 200 bugs fixes might not be on the 'most annoying' list of
most people, but it would be useful to squash 200 bugs. I think we
could all find 2 bugs we could fix, without introducing any updates
to standard packages.
We actually have the occasional bug day where everyone gets together
on IRC with just this goal (though I'm with you that upgrading spkgs
is dangerous). LIkewise, the Sage days in January was focused on just
that: http://wiki.sagemath.org/daysbug2 , though I wouldn't have
called that last effort particularly stabilizing as a lot of deep bugs
were attacked (it was very productive though).
If you want a stabilization release, volunteer to be a release manager
(perhaps partnering with someone else) and only merge "safe" bug
fixes. I don't thing anyone would complain, as long as the release
cycle wasn't too long so that people knew their code their new code
could still get in in a timely manner. If you don't have time for
this, I totally understand, as I don't either.
- Robert
--
To post to this group, send an email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to
sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel
URL: http://www.sagemath.org