[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Upcoming 0.26.0, please review release notes
From: |
Richard Frith-Macdonald |
Subject: |
Re: Upcoming 0.26.0, please review release notes |
Date: |
Tue, 12 Dec 2017 16:54:27 +0000 |
> On 12 Dec 2017, at 16:34, Fred Kiefer <address@hidden> wrote:
>
>
>
>> Am 11.12.2017 um 17:45 schrieb David Chisnall <address@hidden>:
>>
>> On 11 Dec 2017, at 10:46, Ivan Vučica <address@hidden> wrote:
>>>
>>> On Mon, Dec 11, 2017 at 10:43 AM, David Chisnall <address@hidden> wrote:
>>>> On 11 Dec 2017, at 10:33, Ivan Vučica <address@hidden> wrote:
>>>>> I think it's also fine to push a new minor release *after* this
>>>>> release with just your changes. Does that make sense too?
>>>>
>>>> It’s likely to change some of the -base / libobjc2 interfaces and possibly
>>>> be a requirement of the new libobjc2, so I’d prefer a major version bump
>>>> then, but it probably doesn’t have to be one.
>>>>
>>>> I’ve committed the fixes for NSMapTable where we were using the wrong hash
>>>> and equality functions if you use the normal constructors - those are
>>>> probably the most important things to get out.
>>>
>>> Makes sense.
>>>
>>> I think that we can still do a major version bump in a few days, even
>>> if it includes "just" your new fixes.
>>>
>>> I've just spent some time cutting -gui and -back so it would be a
>>> minor effort for me if I were to do it.
>>
>>
>> I had some time to finish up most of the changes and have sent a pull
>> request for review. I think I probably want to add a couple of weak
>> functions for refcount manipulation that will allow either the runtime or
>> -base to provide them, depending on the versions of each.
>>
>
> I had a short look at your pull request and in my opinion it is too complex
> to be merged directly before a release with out proper testing on a lot of
> different machines. We should make a release without it and merge directly
> after that and with a few months of general testing a new release should be
> done.
That's my impression also, but I've only had a chance to take a very, very
quick skim through part of the changes.
I'll try to look through more thoroughly tomorrow.
- Re: Upcoming 0.26.0, please review release notes, (continued)
- Re: Upcoming 0.26.0, please review release notes, Fred Kiefer, 2017/12/10
- Re: Upcoming 0.26.0, please review release notes, Ivan Vučica, 2017/12/10
- Re: Upcoming 0.26.0, please review release notes, Fred Kiefer, 2017/12/11
- Re: Upcoming 0.26.0, please review release notes, David Chisnall, 2017/12/11
- Re: Upcoming 0.26.0, please review release notes, Ivan Vučica, 2017/12/11
- Re: Upcoming 0.26.0, please review release notes, David Chisnall, 2017/12/11
- Re: Upcoming 0.26.0, please review release notes, Ivan Vučica, 2017/12/11
- Re: Upcoming 0.26.0, please review release notes, David Chisnall, 2017/12/11
- Re: Upcoming 0.26.0, please review release notes, Ivan Vučica, 2017/12/11
- Re: Upcoming 0.26.0, please review release notes, Fred Kiefer, 2017/12/12
- Re: Upcoming 0.26.0, please review release notes,
Richard Frith-Macdonald <=
- Re: Upcoming 0.26.0, please review release notes, David Chisnall, 2017/12/14
- [CFT] base and libobjc2 changes [Re: Upcoming 0.26.0, please review release notes], David Chisnall, 2017/12/17
- Re: Upcoming 0.26.0, please review release notes, Richard Frith-Macdonald, 2017/12/11
- Re: Upcoming 0.26.0, please review release notes, Ivan Vučica, 2017/12/11
- Re: Upcoming 0.26.0, please review release notes, Yavor Doganov, 2017/12/11
- Re: Upcoming 0.26.0, please review release notes, David Chisnall, 2017/12/12
- Re: Upcoming 0.26.0, please review release notes, Yavor Doganov, 2017/12/12