Re: Let's switch to time-based releases

2017-12-01 Thread Johan Corveleyn
On Fri, Dec 1, 2017 at 7:13 PM, Nathan Hartman wrote: > On Dec 1, 2017, at 5:38 AM, Branko Čibej wrote: >> >>> On 01.12.2017 13:16, Johan Corveleyn wrote: >>> Great! I gather from the reactions in this thread that we have >>> consensus on the principle, we "just" need to do it :-). And figure >>>

Re: Let's switch to time-based releases

2017-12-01 Thread Nathan Hartman
On Dec 1, 2017, at 5:38 AM, Branko Čibej wrote: > >> On 01.12.2017 13:16, Johan Corveleyn wrote: >> Great! I gather from the reactions in this thread that we have >> consensus on the principle, we "just" need to do it :-). And figure >> out some details. > > Will that be Subversion 18.04 Anticli

Re: Let's switch to time-based releases

2017-12-01 Thread Jacek Materna
6 month 2 year LTS On Fri, Dec 1, 2017 at 7:38 AM, Branko Čibej wrote: > On 01.12.2017 13:16, Johan Corveleyn wrote: > > Great! I gather from the reactions in this thread that we have > > consensus on the principle, we "just" need to do it :-). And figure > > out some details. > > Will that be S

Re: Let's switch to time-based releases

2017-12-01 Thread Branko Čibej
On 01.12.2017 13:16, Johan Corveleyn wrote: > Great! I gather from the reactions in this thread that we have > consensus on the principle, we "just" need to do it :-). And figure > out some details. Will that be Subversion 18.04 Anticlimactic Albatross? -- Brane

Re: Let's switch to time-based releases

2017-12-01 Thread Johan Corveleyn
Great! I gather from the reactions in this thread that we have consensus on the principle, we "just" need to do it :-). And figure out some details. - WC multiple format support: we're okay for now (1.8 - 1.10 have the same format), but for 1.11 it would be good if we can make better-pristines hap

Re: Let's switch to time-based releases

2017-11-30 Thread Julian Foad
Branko Čibej wrote: In the meantime, it appears that 1.8, 1.9 and 1.10 will all use the same WC format (Julian? I hope stashes don't shatter that dream). That's correct. - Julian So we're pretty well covered in that respect. For now. -- Brane

Re: Let's switch to time-based releases

2017-11-28 Thread Branko Čibej
On 28.11.2017 23:25, Stefan wrote: > On 28/11/2017 22:34, Branko Čibej wrote: >> On 28.11.2017 20:23, Stefan wrote: >>> On 28/11/2017 16:16, Branko Čibej wrote: On 28.11.2017 15:01, Stefan wrote: > I'm also a bit worried about the acceptance of faster releases (i.e. > once every 6 mont

Re: Let's switch to time-based releases

2017-11-28 Thread Stefan
On 28/11/2017 22:34, Branko Čibej wrote: > On 28.11.2017 20:23, Stefan wrote: >> On 28/11/2017 16:16, Branko Čibej wrote: >>> On 28.11.2017 15:01, Stefan wrote: I'm also a bit worried about the acceptance of faster releases (i.e. once every 6 months). Maybe we'd simply send out a mail to

Re: Let's switch to time-based releases

2017-11-28 Thread Branko Čibej
On 28.11.2017 20:23, Stefan wrote: > On 28/11/2017 16:16, Branko Čibej wrote: >> On 28.11.2017 15:01, Stefan wrote: >>> I'm also a bit worried about the acceptance of faster releases (i.e. >>> once every 6 months). Maybe we'd simply send out a mail to maintainers >>> polling for which time line the

Re: Let's switch to time-based releases

2017-11-28 Thread Stefan
On 28/11/2017 16:16, Branko Čibej wrote: > On 28.11.2017 15:01, Stefan wrote: >> I'm also a bit worried about the acceptance of faster releases (i.e. >> once every 6 months). Maybe we'd simply send out a mail to maintainers >> polling for which time line they'd prefer (i.e. 6, 9, 12, 24 months for

Re: Let's switch to time-based releases

2017-11-28 Thread Branko Čibej
On 28.11.2017 15:01, Stefan wrote: > I'm also a bit worried about the acceptance of faster releases (i.e. > once every 6 months). Maybe we'd simply send out a mail to maintainers > polling for which time line they'd prefer (i.e. 6, 9, 12, 24 months for > new releases)? Just for us to get some idea

Re: Let's switch to time-based releases

2017-11-28 Thread Stefan
On 28/11/2017 14:03, Evgeny Kotkov wrote: > Branko Čibej writes: > >>> I know this has been discussed before, but it was never made reality. >>> On last week's hackathon we also didn't come to a full consensus on >>> various details. But I think we should simply work out those details, >>> hopeful

Re: Let's switch to time-based releases

2017-11-28 Thread Evgeny Kotkov
Branko Čibej writes: >> I know this has been discussed before, but it was never made reality. >> On last week's hackathon we also didn't come to a full consensus on >> various details. But I think we should simply work out those details, >> hopefully come to some compromise, and if so, JFD it. >

Re: Let's switch to time-based releases

2017-11-27 Thread Branko Čibej
On 27.11.2017 14:52, Johan Corveleyn wrote: > I know this has been discussed before, but it was never made reality. > On last week's hackathon we also didn't come to a full consensus on > various details. But I think we should simply work out those details, > hopefully come to some compromise, and

Let's switch to time-based releases

2017-11-27 Thread Johan Corveleyn
At the hackathon last week we (Stefan Hett, Stefan Fuhrmann, Julian, Bert and I) discussed how we could get releases out faster. We exchanged ideas of how we could do "time-based releases", i.e. to agree on a fixed schedule of doing releases, not waiting for particular features or bugfixes (except