You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@subversion.apache.org by Julian Foad <ju...@apache.org> on 2018/09/08 16:38:44 UTC
Re: Feature freeze for 1.11
I plan to make the 1.11.x branch in the next few days if I'm satisfied with the items below.
Julian Foad wrote on 2018-08-13:
> We plan to release 1.11 in October, let's say mid-October, so we should
> branch and feature-freeze in mid-August, which is just about now.
>
> AFAIK the only significant new work is the experimental 'checkpointing'
> extension to shelving.
>
> -> I will wrap that up by finishing or disabling any unfinished parts.
> 'shelf-diff' needs attention, in particular.
>
> The new simpler release schedule description that we agreed on is still
> in 'staging'.
That was published to http://subversion.apache.org/roadmap.html .
> Is anyone working on or planning any other enhancements, features, or
> anything that needs to be 'frozen'?
[...]
- Julian
Re: 1.11 release preparation
Posted by Julian Foad <ju...@apache.org>.
The 1.11 release notes:
http://subversion.apache.org/docs/release-notes/1.11.html
now contain everything I think they need to, including very brief descriptions of the most notable items from CHANGES. *Very* brief, I'm telling you, in some cases. Can anybody review it and/or expand any sections?
--
- Julian
Re: 1.11 release preparation [was: Feature freeze for 1.11]
Posted by Julian Foad <ju...@apache.org>.
Daniel Shahaf wrote:
> Julian Foad wrote on Wed, 12 Sep 2018 20:39 +0100:
> > I will plan to release 1.11 on 2018-10-17 which is a Wednesday 5 weeks
> > from today. I have to enter a planned release date in the CHANGES file,
>
> I'm not sure you do, not yet. [...]
Technically you're right about the CHANGES file, but I'm really asking about planning the date. The CHANGES file was just the trigger that caused me to think right now about planning a specific date.
> > so I needed to pick something. Is that reasonable?
We decided to go for timed releases and we need to plan this release. I hope we (all of us) are willing to set a date now and attempt to release on that date, on condition that I get the RM tasks done in time.
"Why do we need to set a specific date?", we might ask. We know we can't *guarantee* to release on the chosen date because we won't release anything that hasn't passed certain checks and procedures. But I need to decide when to roll the release candidate, and so on. And one of the reasons why we chose to follow a scheduled release plan is so that consumers of the release can make their own plans around our releases. For that reason I think we should make the planned date public.
I propose 2018-10-17 for the release. That's about 6 months after the 1.10 release date 2018-04-13. Working backward 4 weeks, that means an RC must be rolled by 2018-09-19 (next Wednesday) at the latest.
Any other thoughts about this?
- Julian
Re: 1.11 release preparation [was: Feature freeze for 1.11]
Posted by Daniel Shahaf <d....@daniel.shahaf.name>.
Julian Foad wrote on Wed, 12 Sep 2018 20:39 +0100:
> I will plan to release 1.11 on 2018-10-17 which is a Wednesday 5 weeks
> from today. I have to enter a planned release date in the CHANGES file,
I'm not sure you do, not yet. The tarball you'll soon be rolling will
be called 1.11.0-rc1, not 1.11.0. The latter will have to be rolled
separately to reset SVN_VER_TAG, so that will be an opportunity to fix
the first line of CHANGES.
> so I needed to pick something. Is that reasonable?
Cheers,
Daniel
1.11 release preparation [was: Feature freeze for 1.11]
Posted by Julian Foad <ju...@apache.org>.
Julian Foad wrote:
> James McCoy wrote:
> > I could still use some help getting the Java 10 support finalized [...]
>
> For my planning of the 1.11 branch, could you please tell/remind me [...]
That was answered on IRC: it does not block the 1.11 branching or release.
I will plan to release 1.11 on 2018-10-17 which is a Wednesday 5 weeks from today. I have to enter a planned release date in the CHANGES file, so I needed to pick something. Is that reasonable?
--
- Julian
Re: Feature freeze for 1.11
Posted by Julian Foad <ju...@apache.org>.
James McCoy wrote:
> Julian Foad wrote:
>> I plan to make the 1.11.x branch in the next few days if I'm satisfied with the items below.
[...]
>>> Is anyone working on or planning any other enhancements, features, or
>>> anything that needs to be 'frozen'?
>
> I could still use some help getting the Java 10 support finalized on
> Windows, if someone has cycles for that.
Hi, James. Thanks for your work on that. Unfortunately I cannot offer any direct help with that.
For my planning of the 1.11 branch, could you please tell/remind me what is the status and severity of the issue, with respect to a 1.11 release? And (at least if it does affect the 1.11 release), can I ask you please to file an issue?
--
- Julian
Re: Feature freeze for 1.11
Posted by James McCoy <ja...@jamessan.com>.
On Sat, Sep 8, 2018 at 12:38 PM Julian Foad <ju...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> I plan to make the 1.11.x branch in the next few days if I'm satisfied with the items below.
>
>
> Julian Foad wrote on 2018-08-13:
> > We plan to release 1.11 in October, let's say mid-October, so we should
> > branch and feature-freeze in mid-August, which is just about now.
> >
> > AFAIK the only significant new work is the experimental 'checkpointing'
> > extension to shelving.
> >
> > -> I will wrap that up by finishing or disabling any unfinished parts.
> > 'shelf-diff' needs attention, in particular.
> >
> > The new simpler release schedule description that we agreed on is still
> > in 'staging'.
>
> That was published to http://subversion.apache.org/roadmap.html .
>
> > Is anyone working on or planning any other enhancements, features, or
> > anything that needs to be 'frozen'?
I could still use some help getting the Java 10 support finalized on
Windows, if someone has cycles for that.
Cheers,
--
James
GPG Key: 1024D/61326D40 2003-09-02 James McCoy <ja...@jamessan.com>
Re: Feature freeze for 1.11
Posted by Stefan Sperling <st...@elego.de>.
On Sat, Sep 08, 2018 at 05:38:44PM +0100, Julian Foad wrote:
> I plan to make the 1.11.x branch in the next few days if I'm satisfied with the items below.
The conflict resolver does not support ambiguous moves yet
for 'local missing' conflicts. I hope to get to that soon.
Patches for this could be backported from trunk so don't let
this block you from creating a branch. It's just something I
would really like to see included in the 1.11 release :)