You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@subversion.apache.org by Stefan Sperling <st...@elego.de> on 2013/05/10 16:32:54 UTC
Releasing 1.7.10
The STATUS file on 1.7.x contains a lot of entries.
There is one critical issue (the \n problem with FSFS) that I would
like to release a fix for ASAP.
I'd be happy to drive the release process for 1.7.10, and would roll
a tarball next Thursday or Friday. This would leave about one week
for additional review and nominations.
Any objections?
Re: Releasing 1.7.10
Posted by Mark Phippard <ma...@gmail.com>.
On Fri, May 10, 2013 at 11:17 AM, Branko Čibej <br...@wandisco.com> wrote:
> On 10.05.2013 16:32, Stefan Sperling wrote:
>> The STATUS file on 1.7.x contains a lot of entries.
>> There is one critical issue (the \n problem with FSFS) that I would
>> like to release a fix for ASAP.
>>
>> I'd be happy to drive the release process for 1.7.10, and would roll
>> a tarball next Thursday or Friday. This would leave about one week
>> for additional review and nominations.
>>
>> Any objections?
>
> I propose we get 1.8.0-rc out the door first.
+1
Let's get an RC officially out the door before we begin this process.
--
Thanks
Mark Phippard
http://markphip.blogspot.com/
Re: Releasing 1.7.10
Posted by Ben Reser <be...@reser.org>.
On Sun, May 19, 2013 at 2:31 AM, Stefan Sperling <st...@elego.de> wrote:
> On Fri, May 10, 2013 at 05:44:07PM +0200, Stefan Sperling wrote:
>> I still don't really see why this is a huge distraction (I've done
>> both 1.8.x and 1.7.x voting during the last few days). But fair enough.
>
> So 1.8.0rc2 is out now.
>
> Can we roll 1.7.10 on Wednesday?
>
> Personally, I'd like to see the svnserve issue fixed (nominations
> for which have already passed review on both 1.6.x and 1.7.x branches),
> as well as the \n FSFS repository corruption issue (which still has
> outstanding nominations on both branches).
+1
> I think we should also release a 1.6.22 with the same fixes.
> I'd volunteer to roll that as well, and manage both releases at the
> same time (unless Ben wants to do one of them, but if he wants a
> break he deserves it very much).
I'm happy to do one of them for you if you want, but if you want to do
both I'm not going to object.
Re: Releasing 1.7.10
Posted by Stefan Sperling <st...@elego.de>.
On Fri, May 10, 2013 at 05:44:07PM +0200, Stefan Sperling wrote:
> I still don't really see why this is a huge distraction (I've done
> both 1.8.x and 1.7.x voting during the last few days). But fair enough.
So 1.8.0rc2 is out now.
Can we roll 1.7.10 on Wednesday?
Personally, I'd like to see the svnserve issue fixed (nominations
for which have already passed review on both 1.6.x and 1.7.x branches),
as well as the \n FSFS repository corruption issue (which still has
outstanding nominations on both branches).
I think we should also release a 1.6.22 with the same fixes.
I'd volunteer to roll that as well, and manage both releases at the
same time (unless Ben wants to do one of them, but if he wants a
break he deserves it very much).
Re: Releasing 1.7.10
Posted by Stefan Sperling <st...@elego.de>.
On Fri, May 10, 2013 at 05:32:05PM +0200, Branko Čibej wrote:
> RC-1 was effectively vetoed by the svnserve threading problems which are
> being actively fixed now. We cannot release that tarball.
Ah, I wasn't aware of that.
I thought we were still going to release that tarball anyway.
> > Are you worried that people will still be busy testing 1.8.0-rc1
> > next week, so they won't have time to review STATUS on 1.7.x?
> >
> > And I don't see why we couldn't prepare two releases somewhat
> > concurrently. Not that I want people to hurry unnecessarily.
> > But it won't hurt to have a 1.7.10 tarball people could sign
> > if they wanted to, would it?
>
> It would be far better to let people concentrate on those fixes than to
> distract them with 1.7.10. There's no rush that I detect.
I still don't really see why this is a huge distraction (I've done
both 1.8.x and 1.7.x voting during the last few days). But fair enough.
Re: Releasing 1.7.10
Posted by Branko Čibej <br...@wandisco.com>.
On 10.05.2013 17:28, Stefan Sperling wrote:
> On Fri, May 10, 2013 at 05:17:47PM +0200, Branko Čibej wrote:
>> On 10.05.2013 16:32, Stefan Sperling wrote:
>>> The STATUS file on 1.7.x contains a lot of entries.
>>> There is one critical issue (the \n problem with FSFS) that I would
>>> like to release a fix for ASAP.
>>>
>>> I'd be happy to drive the release process for 1.7.10, and would roll
>>> a tarball next Thursday or Friday. This would leave about one week
>>> for additional review and nominations.
>>>
>>> Any objections?
>> I propose we get 1.8.0-rc out the door first.
> I've already sent my sigs for 1.8.0-rc1 last week.
RC-1 was effectively vetoed by the svnserve threading problems which are
being actively fixed now. We cannot release that tarball.
> Are you worried that people will still be busy testing 1.8.0-rc1
> next week, so they won't have time to review STATUS on 1.7.x?
>
> And I don't see why we couldn't prepare two releases somewhat
> concurrently. Not that I want people to hurry unnecessarily.
> But it won't hurt to have a 1.7.10 tarball people could sign
> if they wanted to, would it?
It would be far better to let people concentrate on those fixes than to
distract them with 1.7.10. There's no rush that I detect.
-- Brane
--
Branko Čibej
Director of Subversion | WANdisco | www.wandisco.com
Re: Releasing 1.7.10
Posted by Stefan Sperling <st...@elego.de>.
On Fri, May 10, 2013 at 05:17:47PM +0200, Branko Čibej wrote:
> On 10.05.2013 16:32, Stefan Sperling wrote:
> > The STATUS file on 1.7.x contains a lot of entries.
> > There is one critical issue (the \n problem with FSFS) that I would
> > like to release a fix for ASAP.
> >
> > I'd be happy to drive the release process for 1.7.10, and would roll
> > a tarball next Thursday or Friday. This would leave about one week
> > for additional review and nominations.
> >
> > Any objections?
>
> I propose we get 1.8.0-rc out the door first.
I've already sent my sigs for 1.8.0-rc1 last week.
Are you worried that people will still be busy testing 1.8.0-rc1
next week, so they won't have time to review STATUS on 1.7.x?
And I don't see why we couldn't prepare two releases somewhat
concurrently. Not that I want people to hurry unnecessarily.
But it won't hurt to have a 1.7.10 tarball people could sign
if they wanted to, would it?
Re: Releasing 1.7.10
Posted by Branko Čibej <br...@wandisco.com>.
On 10.05.2013 16:32, Stefan Sperling wrote:
> The STATUS file on 1.7.x contains a lot of entries.
> There is one critical issue (the \n problem with FSFS) that I would
> like to release a fix for ASAP.
>
> I'd be happy to drive the release process for 1.7.10, and would roll
> a tarball next Thursday or Friday. This would leave about one week
> for additional review and nominations.
>
> Any objections?
I propose we get 1.8.0-rc out the door first.
--
Branko Čibej
Director of Subversion | WANdisco | www.wandisco.com