The SHA-1 for v0.9.0: 4636a2f3e05f109fc592eff72c1817360a882201
On Sat, Nov 5, 2011 at 4:07 AM, Francois Chouinard wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I have built and tagged v0.9.0 and everything looks OK (many thanks to
> Jeff for finding a last minute issue). The build and the tarballs should be
> available
Hi all,
I have built and tagged v0.9.0 and everything looks OK (many thanks to Jeff
for finding a last minute issue). The build and the tarballs should be
available as soon as I manage to get them properly deployed.
Small mishap: I am very, very sorry for the tagged version commit comment.
I was
Hello component leads,
We got all the approvals needed and are clear for the release of 0.9.
Branch stable-0.9 looks stable and all the unit tests are passing. We even
put the binaries in the right location, thanks to Jeff.
Unless someone has an issue, I will start preparing "the" build.
--
Fr
> I also updated the pom.xml files in master to point to the next major release
> (1.0.0 hopefully).
Great, and we can do 0.9.1, etc. on stable-0.9.
Thanks also for the reminder about cherry-picking, Francois.
Andrew
___
linuxtools-dev mailing list
lin
Hello committers,
I updated the linuxtools-Indigo Hudson job (
https://hudson.eclipse.org/hudson/job/linuxtools-Indigo/) to now use branch
stable-0.9 and ran the first build. I haven't really checked the results yet
but will do (eventually).
I also updated the pom.xml files in master to point to
Hi all,
Branch stable-0.9, based on BD3F1FB4 has just been created and will be the
baseline for release 0.9.
>From this point on, fixes intended for the release should go to stable-0.9
(and probably in master as well :-))
Regards,
--
Francois
___
li
> Just a note that I produced the IP log for release 0.9 and a friendly reminder
> that non-committer contributions are no longer acceptable.
^ ... for 0.9. They're fine for master and will be in 0.9.1, etc.
> I will create branch stable-0.9 shortly from the last 'legit' commit
> (bd3fifb4).
Th
Hi,
Friendly reminder to commiters: last day push contributions from
non-commiters. I will do the IP log work tonight and submit it. The target
release date is Nov/5, three weeks from now.
Regards,
--
Francois
___
linuxtools-dev mailing list
linuxtool
On Wed, Oct 12, 2011 at 2:01 PM, Andrew Overholt wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I re-worked the release engineering page a bit to clearly lay out what
> steps need to be done when. I hope this helps Francois this time and
> others in the future:
>
>
Thanks!
--
Francois
__
Hi,
I re-worked the release engineering page a bit to clearly lay out what
steps need to be done when. I hope this helps Francois this time and
others in the future:
http://wiki.eclipse.org/Linux_Tools_Project/Releng#Release_HOWTO
It's part of the larger http://wiki.eclipse.org/Linux_Tools_Pr
Hello guys,
We have to prepare the IP Log for the 0.9 release this week if we are to
make it in time.
What it means is that contributions from non-committers should be [1]
checked in, and [2] rubberstamped (iplog+) - by the end of the week - for
the bugs that are to make it in the release.
A *ve
Hello component leads,
I just created the folder new-0.9 for the website and filled part of the
info. Feel free to update the section dear to your heart. No emergency but
try not to wait until the last minute :-)
Now would be a good time to go over your bugs/enhancements and tag the ones
that wil
On 19:06:39 Friday 07 October 2011 Francois Chouinard wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I am considering getting involved a little more in the Linux Tools release
> activities and 0.9 could be a nice opportunity to spread the
> load/competence at little more.
>
> This release is scheduled for Oct/26 and it is
Thanks for this, Francois.
> - Is it OK to push the delivery date by 1 week?
It's fine with me.
Andrew
___
linuxtools-dev mailing list
[email protected]
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxtools-dev
14 matches
Mail list logo
