guile-devel
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

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

Re: 1.6.0 release update.


From: Rob Browning
Subject: Re: 1.6.0 release update.
Date: 03 May 2001 20:58:53 -0500
User-agent: Gnus/5.0808 (Gnus v5.8.8) Emacs/20.7

thi <address@hidden> writes:

> so i guess i'd argue for a feature freeze rather than a full release at
> this time.  full release upon documentation "complete" (maybe not so far
> off, in the end).

Well, people may have missed/forgotten one of my first messages
describing what I'm planning, since it was a little while ago, so I'll
re-iterate, and perhaps you'll be more comfortable.

I'm planning to

  0) finish adding srfi-19, and if we hear from Olin in time, SRFI-1.

  1) finish up the RELEASE bits, maybe including some documentation
     work.  I believe I'm waiting to hear from Dirk on a few RELEASE
     items ATM.

  2) integrate the debian/* files if I can get hold of people to
     handle the copyright issues.

  3) build a few times here, running the tests etc.

  4) make sure everything seems fairly ready to go.

  5) branch the code, keeping the soon to be 1.6.0 code at 1.5.X, and
     changing the main trunk to be version 1.7.0.

  6) Make requests to any/all listed in the RELEASES file for testing
     on various architectures.

  7) bump through possibly several 1.5.X revisions to fix whatever
     proves to be wrong.

  8) release 1.6.0.

  9) package 1.6.0 for Debian.

I suspect this whole process, given my day job, may actually take at
least a month, so you may actually have more time than you had asked
for to fix up the docs, etc., and docfixes shouldn't, in general, hurt
the testing process, so they can probably still go in, even close to
the final release.

Also bear in mind, that I'm hoping for the stable releases to have
much shorter lifespans than they have in the past.  I'd like to
release 1.6.{1,2,3,4,5}, etc. as often as needed to add docs and fix
things.  Further, I'd like to try and make sure that 1.8.0 isn't all
that far off so that in the future the stable and unstable branches
don't get quite so far from each other.

We'll see :>

In any case, does this address at least some of your concerns?

-- 
Rob Browning <address@hidden> PGP=E80E0D04F521A094 532B97F5D64E3930



reply via email to

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