Re: Proposed release process/plans - don't branch too soon

Hi Havoc,

On Tue, 2002-06-11 at 16:27, Havoc Pennington wrote:
> Anyhow, once we release 2.0, anything that would break the freeze for
> the 2.0.1 or 2.0.2 micro releases should not be going on the stable
> branch _ever_ anyway; said changes should only be committed to
> 2.1.x. So I don't think we need to branch a 2.0.2 as a subbranch from
> the long-term 2.0 branch.

	Sure - leaving 2.0.2 as incremental tags on the gnome-2-0 branch I can
quite understand, if we agree to branch gnome-2-0 after the 2.0.2 stage
for most core modules, then I'm happy. Clearly gtk+ has branched for 2.2
long ago, so there is ample room for dissent.

	The real reason I'm concerned, is the number of open, and relatively
serious bugs that have been punted beyond Gnome 2.0.0 into 2.0.1 and
presumably shortly thereafter into 2.0.2. 

	[ Also, my feeling is that we'll need to do a paper bag release 2.0.1
anyway, regardless of how much testing we do - but that's another point

> know there will be pressure to churn up 2.0.x stable with vendor
> fixes; but this is a mistake

	Sure - whatever; but IMHO there is precisely 0 point in super hard
freezing a branch that is unusably buggy :-) we have to have a level of
stability to match the frozenness [ not that that's a particularly earth
shattering observation but ... ].

	So - great, I'm happy if the plan is to stick with the current scheme
is that most modules wait until ~2.0.2 [ ~a month or two away ], and
then branch for 2-0.



 mmeeks gnu org  <><, Pseudo Engineer, itinerant idiot

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