Re: Next Libtool Point Release Pending

[Gary V . Vaughan]

Hallo Ralf,

On 7 Aug 2010, at 02:02, Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
> * Gary V. Vaughan wrote on Fri, Aug 06, 2010 at 08:53:15PM CEST:
>> Another viable compromise might be to call the next release
>> 2.3.0?
> 
> Maybe it's early enough to finalize a decision on this when we
> know a bit better which patches are in, and which features can
> be advertised.

Okay, I'll pick this up again in a couple of weeks :) But first...

> There is also our numbering scheme description on
> <http://www.gnu.org/software/libtool/contribute.html>.

Tx. It was good to reread that, as I was going by (several) year
old memories of what I had written ;)

By the reasoning I stated there, we should really have branched
for 2.2 releases before adding any new features.  So, if we
want to release a 2.2.12, then we should make a branch at
v2.2.10 and merge only fixes to it.

Whether or not we decide to do that, master definitely has new
features/code/bugs and should be renumbered to 2.3a until we
decide to make a release from there (either 2.4 or 2.3b depending
on how stable it turns out to be under pre-release testing).

Unless someone disagrees, I'll make branch-2-2 at the v2.2.10 tag,
merge the bug fixes since the tag into it, and bump the version
number in master to 2.3a - all in a day or three.  Actually, I'm
open to persuasion for branching at an earlier tag and merging
back all the fixes since the branch point to make for less new
code in 2.2.12: although I have reservations about removing
anything that was mentioned in NEWS already, because that would
be rather surprising to our users.

We can figure out later where to make a release from, and what to
call it, at the end of the month.

> Gary, any way BTW I can get you to look at
> <http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/bug-libtool/2010-08/msg00004.html>
> that would be lovely.

I've been meaning to find time for this.  I'll definitely get to
it this week.

Cheers,
-- 
Gary V. Vaughan (address@hidden)