guix-devel
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

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

Re: New 'version-1.3.0' branch and lifting string freeze on master


From: Ludovic Courtès
Subject: Re: New 'version-1.3.0' branch and lifting string freeze on master
Date: Sun, 18 Apr 2021 12:09:45 +0200
User-agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/27.2 (gnu/linux)

Hi,

Maxim Cournoyer <maxim.cournoyer@gmail.com> skribis:

> With the remaining issues to be tackled for the current release (v1.3.0)
> due tomorrow, I think we may need a bit of extra time to fix them and do
> more testing.  These are the remaining issues (obtained by pressing the
> 'b' key in Emacs Debbugs while visiting the parent issue with
> 'debbugs-gnu-bugs RET 47297 RET').  The release task issue can also be
> viewed at https://issues.guix.gnu.org/47297.
>
> 47808 important  Bone Baboon        guile-git-0.5.0.drv build failed on 
> i686-linux
> 47567 important  Alexandru-Sergiu M Installer crash in 'uuid->string' for a 
> FAT16 partition
> 44872 important  Tim Magee          GuixSD 1.2.0 installer fails with 
> exception when formatting drive
> 33848 important  Ludovic Courtès    Store references in SBCL-compiled code 
> are "invisible"
> 47841 normal     Julien Lepiller    [release 1.2.1] could not install on 
> foreign distro
> 47745 normal     Mathieu Othacehe   ldap test is failing
> 47744 normal     Mathieu Othacehe   nfs-root-fs test is failing

I agree that we need a bit more time to address these, hopefully get
‘wip-ungrafting’ merged, and above all get more testing.

There are other items from doc/release.org in maintenance.git that will
have to be addressed, such as the dreaded NEWS update and companion blog
post.

> To avoid keep master in string freeze longer, I've now created the
> 'release-v1.3.0' branch where the fixes for the remaining blocking
> issues should go.

Nitpick: could we rename it to ‘version-1.3.0’, similar to the previous
release branches?

BTW, are we going for 1.3.0 rather than 1.2.1?  I’m fine either way,
it’s true that 1.3.0 might better reflect the amount of work that has
gone into it…

> I'll now attempt to produce a first release candidate (RC) via the
> release tooling.

Yay!  If we eventually merge ‘wip-ungrafting’, we should have at least
one RC built with that branch merged.

Thanks,
Ludo’.



reply via email to

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