Re: x.y.z numbering and releases
Martin Sebor wrote: Okay, so just to make sure we're all clear, the process we seem to be converging on goes like this: 1. branch X.Y.Z/ from trunk/ 2. with N starting at 1, tag the X.Y.Z/ branch X.Y.X-rc-N/ and create the corresponding tarball, stdcxx-X.Y.Z-rc-N.tar.gz; vote on tarball 3.1 if the vote passes, rename tarball to stdcxx-X.Y.Z.tar.gz and proceed to publish it 3.2 otherwise, fix problems on the X.Y.Z branch, increment N by 1 and go to 2 I like. Is there anyway we can rename branches/x.y.z/ in such a way as to avoid confusing users that it is the final release? E.g. branches/x.y.z-candidate/ ? When x.y.z is released, the original branches/x.y.z-candiate tree can be svn rm'ed. Bill
[VOTE] publish stdcxx 4.1.3, take 2 (was: Re: Mac OS X and stdcxx )
+1 p.s. Liviu - thanks for the tests on gcc RHAS 4 Itanium... Martin Sebor wrote: > Justin Erenkrantz wrote: > [...] > >>>Since several of them are involved and would require us to recertify >>>the library on all the platforms where it has passed my goal is to get >>>them fixed in 4.1.4. Does that sound reasonable? >> >> >>Sure. Let's just note that Mac OS X isn't supported in the release notes. > > > Okay, this has been done: > http://svn.apache.org/viewcvs.cgi?rev=368452&view=rev > > I also noticed a symbol versioning issue in gcc optimized builds > on Solaris that causes unsats when linking. Since symbol versioning > is still experimental I disabled it on the 4.1.3 branch: > http://svn.apache.org/viewcvs.cgi?rev=368485&view=rev > > I created a new tarball incorporating these changes and replaced > the old one with it. Here's the link again for convenience: > http://people.apache.org/~sebor/stdcxx/stdcxx-incubating-4.1.3.tar.gz > The md5sum for this file is f1bc9bd5ef0966f994a9183e7353176d. > > Since these were the only changes I only smoke-tested this new tarball > with gcc 3.2.3 on Linux and gcc 4.0.2 Solaris with successul results. > I hereby cast my +1 vote to publish this tarball :) > > I assume everyone else's votes are still good and that we just need > a positive vote from you, Bill, or Ben before we can ask the Incubator > PMC for permission to publish it. > > Here's a tally of votes thus far: > >+1: 4 + 1 (johnh, lnicoara, ajindal, sebor + willson) > 0: none >-1: none > > Thanks > Martin
Re: x.y.z numbering and releases
William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote: William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote: I do believe it does, granted the 1.2.3-rc3 branch would be internally labeled (version id) 1.2.3, but the branch it sits on and the tarballs it's packaged in both clearly designate 1.2.3. they designate 1.2.3-rc3!!! Only the internal directory path within the tarball and appropriate header files omit the -rc3 desigation, such that... This resolves Justin's concern about rerolling the tarball, and addresses your concern that like several other Apache packages, you would like to have several review cycles. Okay, so just to make sure we're all clear, the process we seem to be converging on goes like this: 1. branch X.Y.Z/ from trunk/ 2. with N starting at 1, tag the X.Y.Z/ branch X.Y.X-rc-N/ and create the corresponding tarball, stdcxx-X.Y.Z-rc-N.tar.gz; vote on tarball 3.1 if the vote passes, rename tarball to stdcxx-X.Y.Z.tar.gz and proceed to publish it 3.2 otherwise, fix problems on the X.Y.Z branch, increment N by 1 and go to 2 Martin
Re: [VOTE] publish stdcxx 4.1.3
William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote: Martin Sebor wrote: I created a tarball of the stdcxx 4.1.3 branch http://people.apache.org/~sebor/stdcxx/stdcxx-incubating-4.1.3.tar.gz Please vote to publish this tarball on the project Web page: http://incubator.apache.org/stdcxx/download.html +1 with reservations below, Thank you! and -1 with this the final tarball in incubation. I'm not sure I undrestand what you mean -- can you elaborate? I'm concerned with and have expressed my concerns on the PMC w.r.t. copyright and already am satisfied that this will be addressed in the future. Yes. I'm further concerned with some pointers that still remain in the tarball to seek support from Roguewave, rather than the stdcxx project. I trust that all references to contact Roguewave will disappear in the near future. I must have missed these -- can you point me to the files that still bear those references so that I can remove them? For the purposes of moving this effort forward, +1 for an incubating release of this tarball. Thanks again! Martin
Re: [VOTE] publish stdcxx 4.1.3
Martin Sebor wrote: I created a tarball of the stdcxx 4.1.3 branch http://people.apache.org/~sebor/stdcxx/stdcxx-incubating-4.1.3.tar.gz Please vote to publish this tarball on the project Web page: http://incubator.apache.org/stdcxx/download.html +1 with reservations below, and -1 with this the final tarball in incubation. I'm concerned with and have expressed my concerns on the PMC w.r.t. copyright and already am satisfied that this will be addressed in the future. I'm further concerned with some pointers that still remain in the tarball to seek support from Roguewave, rather than the stdcxx project. I trust that all references to contact Roguewave will disappear in the near future. For the purposes of moving this effort forward, +1 for an incubating release of this tarball. Bill
