Re: TARBALLS DUE: Snapshot, Deep Freeze, But No Release Candidate

[Owen Taylor <otaylor redhat com>]

jacob berkman <jacob ximian com> writes:

> On Tue, 2002-06-04 at 08:55, Owen Taylor wrote:
> > jacob berkman <jacob ximian com> writes:
> > 
> > > On Sun, 2002-06-02 at 12:21, Jeff Waugh wrote:
> > > > Hi all,
> > > > 
> > > > Tarballs are due for this week's snapshot, formerly known as "Release
> > > > Candidate 1". We have 9 release critical bugs [1] left to squash, so the release
> > > > team has opted to push the release candidate back by one week.
> > > > 
> > > >  *** However, the final release and deep freeze dates HAVE NOT CHANGED! ***
> > > > 
> > > > As of Monday, no code changes should be committed to shipping modules [2]
> > > > unless directly related to fixing these 9 bugs.
> > > 
> > > to prevent disaster, i really think we need to branch all the modules
> > > for gnome 2.0.0 after this freeze point, so that only fixes for these 9
> > > bugs go in.
> > > 
> > > since we (ximian/sun/[probably red hat]) are still working on 2.0.1 bug
> > > fixing, i'd say HEAD be open for 2.0.1 fixes rather than for 2.x.y
> > > hacking.
> > > 
> > > if this freeze is happening tomorrow, then we need to reach a consensus
> > > on this quickly.
> > 
> > I'd really suggest that it would be better to do the 2.0.1 work on
> > a branch; it's just a whole lot simpler if you don't have to merge
> > the "development" branch onto HEAD at some point, and create
> > a new -2-0 branch.
> 
> you mean, do 2.0.0 from HEAD, work on 2.0.1 in a branch, and then merge
> that up after 2.0.0 comes out?

No, I mean you make a -2-0 branch now, work on that, make 2.0.0 from that,
continue working on that branch for 2.0.1.

Regards,
                                        Owen