[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: release plans

From: Mike Solomon
Subject: Re: release plans
Date: Wed, 22 Sep 2010 19:39:00 -0400
User-agent: Microsoft-Entourage/

Sorry for the slow response - I'm having trouble with my copy of the source
(too much tinkering...not enough sleep...).  Could someone please run the
appropriate regtests on Neil's patch and see if it breaks anything?


On 9/22/10 12:11 PM, "Graham Percival" <address@hidden> wrote:

> Here's an update on the release plans.  These are not cast in
> stone; if you have a thoughtful objection or suggestion, I'm
> willing to change things.
> 1) 2.13.34, "alpha test" has been released.
> 2) website has been switched over.  At first glance, I think I can
> close issue 1244 now, but I want to double-check and wait for
> feedback.
> 3) after 1244 is done, there's only one remaning Critical issue;
> NB: I expect approximately 5 more regressions to be reported in
> the next week.  Some of them might not be regressions in code that
> worked deliberately.  Bug Squad (if you read -devel): add any
> regression as a Critical issue; if a programmer points out that it
> only worked by a fluke in the past and downgrades it to Medium,
> that's totally fine.  That's how the system is supposed to work. :)
> 4) if a bunch of development has occurred but Critical issues
> remain, I'll release 2.13.35 as a "second alpha test".  Repeat as
> necessary.
> 5) Once we have 0 Critical issues, I'll branch stable/2.14 from
> master, and make a "release candidate" from that.  We now wait 2
> weeks.
> Development can continue as usual on master.  The translation
> meister can backport translation patches to stable/2.14 if he
> wants; other people leave it alone.
> 6) if a Critical issue is reported, the clock resets.  Once we
> have a bugfix, that gets backported to stable/2.14.  No other
> changes to stable/2.14 occur[*].  I make a second release candidate,
> and we go back to step 5.
> [*] I'm willing to be flexible on this point -- we might prefer to
> merge everything from master into stable/2.14, or cherry-pick
> minor bugfixes and doc changes, or whatever.  But my initial
> impulse is not to allow any non-Critical bugfixes, because I am
> bloody sick of seeing the number 2.13 and any change could have
> side effects.
> Cheers,
> - Graham
> _______________________________________________
> lilypond-devel mailing list
> address@hidden

reply via email to

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