[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Axiom-developer] stable release schedule

From: Martin Rubey
Subject: Re: [Axiom-developer] stable release schedule
Date: Fri, 17 Dec 2004 21:47:57 +0100

C Y writes:
 > --- root <address@hidden> wrote:
 > > My suggestion is that we bring axiom--main--1 up to a tested release
 > > version as of the 1st of every month. That way the Savannah version is at
 > > most a month behind the latest merged version in main.  Plus this will
 > > give developers a target to shoot for when developing features and an idea
 > > of when the merged versions will emerge.

I think that this is a good idea. There is one thing which should go along with
this schedule however: *what* we want to target at. Whether the period will be
one or three months does not seem so important to me. We should, however, take
into account major holidays: Christmas, end of term in January (or is that an
Austriacism?), Easter, end of term in June...

So, to fill this with a little life, I'd like to have the first "real" release
just before February with

* all the known (build and algebra) patches integrated
  By the way: whats the status of bug #5977 x^2+1::DMP([x],INT) 

* my guessing package ready and documented. (that's my part, however, this
  shouldn't really be part of the distribution, should it?

While we are at it, here's another idea: I think it would be sensible to divide
Axiom into two pieces: the Algebra and the rest. If it would be that way, we
could have several tla/arch branches like operating systems, book, graphics,
hyperdoc, various lisp implementations and one common branch algebra.

This way, the mathematics would be roughly the same for all branches and we
wouldn't be in the awkward situation that Bill says "well, I'll try to
integrate some of the patches into the windows version right now, but the linux
versions have to wait until the weekend". They would be the same automatically!


 > I like the idea (not that I'm qualified to have an opinion)

Why wouldn't you be qualified?

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]