Re: GOP2-2b - Stable 2.16.x releases (dictator) (probable decision)

[Graham Percival]

On Wed, Aug 01, 2012 at 02:37:58PM +0200, David Kastrup wrote:
> Graham Percival <address@hidden> writes:
> 
> >> What versioning should I be using for the release
> >> candidates?  Numerically, one has the options to start with
> >>
> >> 2.15.95
> >
> > why not 2.15.42 ?
> 
> Because the 2.16 branch is supposed to produce the versions for
> prereleases of GNU/Linux distributions.  We won't be able to sell it for
> that purpose using 2.15.42 as a number.  And anyway, 2.15.42 is already
> taken for the next _unstable_ release.

I'm not certain what you mean by "prereleases of GNU/Linux
distributions".  If 2.16.0 is not out, then distributions like
Ubuntu or Redhat shouldn't be touching 2.15.x.

> >> 2.16.0.95
> >
> > I don't think that GUB supports this.  There are hints in the code
> 
> It would make sense to put this under scrutiny.  There is support for it
> in our VERSION file and several Makefiles, it has been used in the past.

"past" being about 10 years ago.

> If it is non-operative, it should be either made operative or removed.
> There is no point dragging it along as purely dead weight we should not
> be using.

Sure, patches appreciated.
Initial wild guess: 20 hours to fix stuff in lilypond git, and 20
hours to fix stuff in GUB.  Not counting the time it takes you to
find a computer that can actually compile GUB.

> > ... still, I think the easiest thing is not to have devel releases
> > until 2.16.0 is out.
> 
> A prerelease is not a "devel" release.  2.15.42 has had 56 issues so far
> in 3 weeks.  The stabilizing phase of branch 2.16 will take several
> weeks at least, or the "stable" label will be a mockery.

Yes, this is tricky.

> By the time we release 2.17.0, I want to have a version of the 2.16
> branch out that is clearly recognizable as different from the 2.15
> releases so far, even if it is not the final stable release.

I'm missing something.  What's wrong with this scenario:
- I release 2.15.42 today or tomorrow.
- you branch stable/2.16 from that.
- in a week I release 2.17.0.
- you do whatever you want with 2.15.43, 2.15.44, etc, until you
  reach 2.16.0.  Other than probably having no syntax changes
  because I really don't know how that can be juggled.

> 2.15.95 would presumably protest against snippets already being at
> 2.16.0.

The final change of version numbers it the last thing we've done
in the past, and just tested on my local machine with make doc.

> Complicated.

There's a bunch of notes in the CG releases chapter.  But be
warned that they're mostly out of date and therefore probably
misleading.

Still, it might give some clues that might be helpful.

- Graham