Re: Changes: GNOME 3.35/3.36 release schedule
Ühel kenal päeval, N, 12.09.2019 kell 09:45, kirjutas Milan Crha via desktop-devel-list: > On Wed, 2019-09-11 at 14:09 +0200, Andre Klapper wrote: > > * Stable maintenance releases over a longer period > > As a real life example, I skipped 3.32.5 this year, because there was > no code change in the stable branch with which the users could > benefit. > The late stables are for bug fixes, from my point of view. From a downstream (that doesn't roll separate l10n packs) perspective - please also consider with updated translations on the stable branch, when deciding whether to cut or not a release at these extra stable maintenance release points. Other than that, I would really appreciate if maintainers would actually release the bug fixes sitting in their stable branches eventually; often I see that these will never see a release tarball and downstreams need to go pick them up manually and add their own patchsets for them. So giving a nudge towards that with these extra stable release dates is welcome in my eyes. Mart ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: Changes: GNOME 3.35/3.36 release schedule
On Thu, Sep 12, 2019 at 8:22 AM, Bastien Nocera wrote: This is very important for the maintainers of libraries that live in the GNOME runtime. Do we have a full list of those? What happens if there are security issues that crop up in the meanwhile? Security issues that crop up in the meanwhile will be fixed in the next runtime update, *if* the issue is in a tarball that's updated by our release scripts and the module is flagged for such updates. All GNOME stuff should be included, as should freedesktop stuff that uploads tarballs outside GitLab. GitLab/GitHub-hosted tarballs require manual updates and thus are not updated. Keep in mind there is no GNOME security team. Or, to the extent that there is a GNOME security team, it's myself and Tobi spending five minutes per vulnerability to ensure project maintainers know they're on their own. :P And there is currently no human watching for security issues or handling security advisories anyway. That's why I'm still not entirely comfortable with Epiphany returning to Flathub at this time. So, status quo is not good. But this will still be better than we've ever had before, because until now we've had no scheduled runtime rebuilds at all after the .2 stable release. Of course, you can always manually propose updates to specific packages in gnome-build-meta whenever you want. That's what I do for WebKit updates, for example. The schedule only shows when release-team will get around to doing it for you. So if you have a particular issue that you think shouldn't wait until the next scheduled update, go ahead and propose a merge request to gnome-build-meta. Michael ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: Changes: GNOME 3.35/3.36 release schedule
On Thu, 2019-09-12 at 08:19 -0500, mcatanz...@gnome.org wrote: > On Thu, Sep 12, 2019 at 2:45 AM, Milan Crha via desktop-devel-list > wrote: > > As a real life example, I skipped 3.32.5 this year, because there > > was > > no code change in the stable branch with which the users could > > benefit. > > The late stables are for bug fixes, from my point of view. > > I wondered about how to best present that on the schedule. > > We don't actually expect you to release tarballs past 3.34.0 unless > you > have actual need to do so (bugfixes that need released). These are > more > informational deadlines so that you know when our runtime updates > will > occur. > > E.g. say you release 3.34.0 on time, then by some magic nobody > reports > any bugs in evolution-data-server for four months. (Wouldn't that be > nice?) We make it to February and finally you have some fixes that > you > want to release. If you release your 3.34.1 by the tarball deadline > for > 3.34.5, then your 3.34.1 will make it into the 3.34.5 runtime update > during the next week. Otherwise it might wait six weeks until the > 3.34.6 runtime update. (We'll be doing 3.34 releases until March > next > year, because the runtime will be supported for one year. This > schedule > only shows the first half of the 3.34 lifetime.) This is very important for the maintainers of libraries that live in the GNOME runtime. Do we have a full list of those? What happens if there are security issues that crop up in the meanwhile? ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: Changes: GNOME 3.35/3.36 release schedule
On Thu, Sep 12, 2019 at 2:45 AM, Milan Crha via desktop-devel-list wrote: As a real life example, I skipped 3.32.5 this year, because there was no code change in the stable branch with which the users could benefit. The late stables are for bug fixes, from my point of view. I wondered about how to best present that on the schedule. We don't actually expect you to release tarballs past 3.34.0 unless you have actual need to do so (bugfixes that need released). These are more informational deadlines so that you know when our runtime updates will occur. E.g. say you release 3.34.0 on time, then by some magic nobody reports any bugs in evolution-data-server for four months. (Wouldn't that be nice?) We make it to February and finally you have some fixes that you want to release. If you release your 3.34.1 by the tarball deadline for 3.34.5, then your 3.34.1 will make it into the 3.34.5 runtime update during the next week. Otherwise it might wait six weeks until the 3.34.6 runtime update. (We'll be doing 3.34 releases until March next year, because the runtime will be supported for one year. This schedule only shows the first half of the 3.34 lifetime.) Michael ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: Changes: GNOME 3.35/3.36 release schedule
On Wed, 2019-09-11 at 14:09 +0200, Andre Klapper wrote: > * Stable maintenance releases over a longer period Hi, does it make sense to have 3.34.5 at the time of 3.36.1? I guess not for majority of the projects. Even if it would be a soft requirement, it happens that the stable branch doesn't get that much attention after the first half, like after 3.x.2. I do not tell it, because previous schedules ended with 3.x.2, I released up to 3.x.5, which was usually aligned with 3.x+1.90 release. I do not think forcing even soft requirement for more stable releases make any sense, if the maintainers would like to give users more fixes in the current stable version, they are already doing it. There are projects which do that, even for older stable releases, but it's a real minority. As a real life example, I skipped 3.32.5 this year, because there was no code change in the stable branch with which the users could benefit. The late stables are for bug fixes, from my point of view. Just my opinion and experience from the past years. Bye, Milan ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Changes: GNOME 3.35/3.36 release schedule
Hi everyone, The release schedule for GNOME 3.35/3.36 is available at https://wiki.gnome.org/ThreePointThirtyfive There are some changes. Please make yourself familiar. Mainly, * Tarballs are due on Saturday (not Monday anymore) * Stable and unstable Tarball Due on the same day * Stable maintenance releases over a longer period * Releases are published when ready (not necessarily on Wednesday) There is also an ICS file available for your calendar at webcal://www.gnome.org/start/unstable/schedule.ics It's also linked from https://wiki.gnome.org/MaintainersCorner Thanks, andre -- Andre Klapper | ak...@gmx.net https://blogs.gnome.org/aklapper/ ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
