mc release schedule?
Hi Miguel (and list), Both you and pchel have put out tarballs, and we're nearing the time in which you wanted to see a release. After talking to Leonard den Ottolander off list, the question was asked where we're at with that process? Specifically, has anyone reconsiled your tarball with pchel's, and do we know the current state of the existing bugs that remain outstanding? -- Regards, Scott ___ Mc-devel mailing list http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/mc-devel
Re: mc release schedule?
Hello, Both you and pchel have put out tarballs, and we're nearing the time in which you wanted to see a release. After talking to Leonard den Ottolander off list, the question was asked where we're at with that process? Specifically, has anyone reconsiled your tarball with pchel's, and do we know the current state of the existing bugs that remain outstanding? I would take the tarball that was posted as the release. The only downside is that I do not have access to ibiblio.org to upload it. As for bugs pending: we should fix those on the next iteration. Miguel. ___ Mc-devel mailing list http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/mc-devel
Re: mc release schedule?
Hi Miguel, On Fri, 2005-06-17 at 18:23, Miguel de Icaza wrote: I would take the tarball that was posted as the release. The only downside is that I do not have access to ibiblio.org to upload it. Please don't do that. Take a little time to coordinate this. It's not much use if you do an ad hoc release without consulting the developers. The double free bug should definitely be fixed before a release. Why don't you do one release candidate after it has been fixed and the final release in a week or so? Leonard. -- mount -t life -o ro /dev/dna /genetic/research ___ Mc-devel mailing list http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/mc-devel
Re: mc release schedule?
Hello Miguel, On Fri, 2005-06-17 at 21:07, Miguel de Icaza wrote: Are we talking about trunk or the branch? I thought the branch was ready to go. Pavel Tsekov discovered a double free bug in PRE for which he has proposed a fix. I haven't had time to fully investigate this, but I believe that should be fixed before a release. More generally speaking procedure wise I think it would be better to have a release candidate that people can test to stamp out the most serious bugs (like double frees etc.), but we should *not* introduce any new features/enhancements. I think a proper release candidate might get us more testers. For the rest I'm quite confident in the PRE branch, and I think the other developers don't find a release candidate very necessary as we've been waiting quite a while, but I would prefer it if we'd follow proper procedures (development stop (already in december ;) ), release candidate, fix serious bugs only (one or two weeks), release, introduction of new features in HEAD, etc.). Leonard. -- mount -t life -o ro /dev/dna /genetic/research ___ Mc-devel mailing list http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/mc-devel
