You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@perl.apache.org by "Philippe M. Chiasson" <go...@ectoplasm.org> on 2005/01/18 03:21:37 UTC
Time for RC4?
I think there has been enough important fixes since RC3 to make RC4.
Unless anybody objects loudly, I'll be rolling out RC4 sometime tomorrow.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Philippe M. Chiasson m/gozer\@(apache|cpan|ectoplasm)\.org/ GPG KeyID : 88C3A5A5
http://gozer.ectoplasm.org/ F9BF E0C2 480E 7680 1AE5 3631 CB32 A107 88C3A5A5
Re: Time for RC4?
Posted by Adam Kennedy <ad...@phase-n.com>.
If the version contains an underscore, it won't be indexed. It is
considered a "developer" version.
Adam
Geoffrey Young wrote:
>
> Randal L. Schwartz wrote:
>
>>>>>>>"Philippe" == Philippe M Chiasson <go...@ectoplasm.org> writes:
>>
>>
>>Philippe> I think there has been enough important fixes since RC3 to make RC4.
>>Philippe> Unless anybody objects loudly, I'll be rolling out RC4 sometime tomorrow.
>>
>>Does RC4 do anything to address the CPAN indexing issue and
>>incorrectly duplicated module names?
>
>
> no, because we haven't decided on a resolution yet.
>
>
>>If not, please be sure that Andreas and the gang do not index this
>>release.
>
>
> I don't know whether previous release candidates have been indexed, but if
> they were then whether this one is indexed doesn't make any difference, does
> it? that is, the "damage" has been done and nothing can really undo it at
> this point save some manual CPAN intervention, right?
>
>
>>Also, a proposal was promised about how these issues will be resolved.
>>I've not yet seen anything from the core team about the naming and
>>coexistance issues.
>
>
> we're working on it. please understand that this is not a simple issue, so
> it will take time.
>
>
>>So, consider this a "loud objection" unless these issues are resolved,
>>and just not yet communicated.
>
>
> development, such as the preparation of release candidates or other work,
> will not stop just because the namespace issue is not resolved. I fully
> expect to see new release candidates rolling as the actual API gets more
> solid, other important bugs (like segfaults) are fixed, and so on.
>
> despite all the discussions of late, as has been mentioned before, there are
> lots of people out there taking the time to test the 2.0 API for whom
> namespaces just weren't an issue but things like the proper functioning of
> $r->foo() was - the release candidates are targeted toward those people.
>
> so, rest assured that an official 2.0 will not be released until we have a
> solution to the namespace issue, but until then development will continue on
> other things as well.
>
> also, understand that the "solution" may not be one that _you_ (as any given
> individual who reads this, not just randal) particularly like, but rather
> one that the pmc thinks comes closest to satisfying all the different issues
> and needs of the community (which includes developers, users, CPAN tools,
> and other factors). that is, please don't think that *poof* everything will
> be groovy when it's all over and then bad mouth things when it doesn't look
> like you expect it to look - everyone will have to compromise here, take a
> deep breath, and move on.
>
> --Geoff
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@perl.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@perl.apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@perl.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@perl.apache.org
Re: Time for RC4?
Posted by "Philippe M. Chiasson" <go...@ectoplasm.org>.
Geoffrey Young wrote:
>
> Randal L. Schwartz wrote:
>
>>>>>>>"Philippe" == Philippe M Chiasson <go...@ectoplasm.org> writes:
>>
>>Philippe> I think there has been enough important fixes since RC3 to make RC4.
>>Philippe> Unless anybody objects loudly, I'll be rolling out RC4 sometime tomorrow.
>>
>>Does RC4 do anything to address the CPAN indexing issue and
>>incorrectly duplicated module names?
>
> no, because we haven't decided on a resolution yet.
>
>>If not, please be sure that Andreas and the gang do not index this
>>release.
>
> I don't know whether previous release candidates have been indexed, but if
> they were then whether this one is indexed doesn't make any difference, does
> it? that is, the "damage" has been done and nothing can really undo it at
> this point save some manual CPAN intervention, right?
Yes, the first RC should have been a '_' release, not indexed, but it got
accidently got a '-' instead. Since then, RC2 and RC3 were released in the
same fashion, were indexed, and allowed many indexing problems to be identified
and fixed. So in a way, this mistake allowed us to see what needed ot get fixed.
RC4 itself, has no new code to deal with CPAN indexing, but between RC3 and now,
various problems were resolved on the PAUSE Indexer side. Releasing RC4 will most
certainly not make things more broken on the CPAN side of things. And there were
valuable unrelated fixes checked in since RC3.
>>Also, a proposal was promised about how these issues will be resolved.
>>I've not yet seen anything from the core team about the naming and
>>coexistance issues.
>
> we're working on it. please understand that this is not a simple issue, so
> it will take time.
>
>>So, consider this a "loud objection" unless these issues are resolved,
>>and just not yet communicated.
>
> development, such as the preparation of release candidates or other work,
> will not stop just because the namespace issue is not resolved. I fully
> expect to see new release candidates rolling as the actual API gets more
> solid, other important bugs (like segfaults) are fixed, and so on.
>
> despite all the discussions of late, as has been mentioned before, there are
> lots of people out there taking the time to test the 2.0 API for whom
> namespaces just weren't an issue but things like the proper functioning of
> $r->foo() was - the release candidates are targeted toward those people.
Yes, and for reference, here is the thread were we discussed the RC process
for 2.0: http://gossamer-threads.com/lists/modperl/dev/75891
> so, rest assured that an official 2.0 will not be released until we have a
> solution to the namespace issue, but until then development will continue on
> other things as well.
I agree, and I'll be making the RC builds sometime tomorrow morning most likely.
> also, understand that the "solution" may not be one that _you_ (as any given
> individual who reads this, not just randal) particularly like, but rather
> one that the pmc thinks comes closest to satisfying all the different issues
> and needs of the community (which includes developers, users, CPAN tools,
> and other factors). that is, please don't think that *poof* everything will
> be groovy when it's all over and then bad mouth things when it doesn't look
> like you expect it to look - everyone will have to compromise here, take a
> deep breath, and move on.
Well said geoff.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Philippe M. Chiasson m/gozer\@(apache|cpan|ectoplasm)\.org/ GPG KeyID : 88C3A5A5
http://gozer.ectoplasm.org/ F9BF E0C2 480E 7680 1AE5 3631 CB32 A107 88C3A5A5
Re: Time for RC4?
Posted by "Randal L. Schwartz" <me...@stonehenge.com>.
>>>>> "Geoffrey" == Geoffrey Young <ge...@modperlcookbook.org> writes:
>>
>> If not, please be sure that Andreas and the gang do not index this
>> release.
Geoffrey> I don't know whether previous release candidates have been
Geoffrey> indexed, but if they were then whether this one is indexed
Geoffrey> doesn't make any difference, does it? that is, the "damage"
Geoffrey> has been done and nothing can really undo it at this point
Geoffrey> save some manual CPAN intervention, right?
Actually, we've got a problem right now with RC3... apparently,
Apache::PerlSections got indexed. If you can fix that for RC4, great.
Geoffrey> so, rest assured that an official 2.0 will not be released
Geoffrey> until we have a solution to the namespace issue, but until
Geoffrey> then development will continue on other things as well.
Thank you.
Geoffrey> also, understand that the "solution" may not be one that
Geoffrey> _you_ (as any given individual who reads this, not just
Geoffrey> randal) particularly like, but rather one that the pmc
Geoffrey> thinks comes closest to satisfying all the different issues
Geoffrey> and needs of the community (which includes developers,
Geoffrey> users, CPAN tools, and other factors). that is, please
Geoffrey> don't think that *poof* everything will be groovy when it's
Geoffrey> all over and then bad mouth things when it doesn't look like
Geoffrey> you expect it to look - everyone will have to compromise
Geoffrey> here, take a deep breath, and move on.
I completely understand this. My main concern was to raise the issue
so that people knew there was an issue, and that there still is an
issue. :)
--
Randal L. Schwartz - Stonehenge Consulting Services, Inc. - +1 503 777 0095
<me...@stonehenge.com> <URL:http://www.stonehenge.com/merlyn/>
Perl/Unix/security consulting, Technical writing, Comedy, etc. etc.
See PerlTraining.Stonehenge.com for onsite and open-enrollment Perl training!
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@perl.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@perl.apache.org
Re: Time for RC4?
Posted by Geoffrey Young <ge...@modperlcookbook.org>.
Randal L. Schwartz wrote:
>>>>>>"Philippe" == Philippe M Chiasson <go...@ectoplasm.org> writes:
>
>
> Philippe> I think there has been enough important fixes since RC3 to make RC4.
> Philippe> Unless anybody objects loudly, I'll be rolling out RC4 sometime tomorrow.
>
> Does RC4 do anything to address the CPAN indexing issue and
> incorrectly duplicated module names?
no, because we haven't decided on a resolution yet.
>
> If not, please be sure that Andreas and the gang do not index this
> release.
I don't know whether previous release candidates have been indexed, but if
they were then whether this one is indexed doesn't make any difference, does
it? that is, the "damage" has been done and nothing can really undo it at
this point save some manual CPAN intervention, right?
>
> Also, a proposal was promised about how these issues will be resolved.
> I've not yet seen anything from the core team about the naming and
> coexistance issues.
we're working on it. please understand that this is not a simple issue, so
it will take time.
>
> So, consider this a "loud objection" unless these issues are resolved,
> and just not yet communicated.
development, such as the preparation of release candidates or other work,
will not stop just because the namespace issue is not resolved. I fully
expect to see new release candidates rolling as the actual API gets more
solid, other important bugs (like segfaults) are fixed, and so on.
despite all the discussions of late, as has been mentioned before, there are
lots of people out there taking the time to test the 2.0 API for whom
namespaces just weren't an issue but things like the proper functioning of
$r->foo() was - the release candidates are targeted toward those people.
so, rest assured that an official 2.0 will not be released until we have a
solution to the namespace issue, but until then development will continue on
other things as well.
also, understand that the "solution" may not be one that _you_ (as any given
individual who reads this, not just randal) particularly like, but rather
one that the pmc thinks comes closest to satisfying all the different issues
and needs of the community (which includes developers, users, CPAN tools,
and other factors). that is, please don't think that *poof* everything will
be groovy when it's all over and then bad mouth things when it doesn't look
like you expect it to look - everyone will have to compromise here, take a
deep breath, and move on.
--Geoff
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@perl.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@perl.apache.org
Re: Time for RC4?
Posted by "Randal L. Schwartz" <me...@stonehenge.com>.
>>>>> "Philippe" == Philippe M Chiasson <go...@ectoplasm.org> writes:
Philippe> I think there has been enough important fixes since RC3 to make RC4.
Philippe> Unless anybody objects loudly, I'll be rolling out RC4 sometime tomorrow.
Does RC4 do anything to address the CPAN indexing issue and
incorrectly duplicated module names?
If not, please be sure that Andreas and the gang do not index this
release.
Also, a proposal was promised about how these issues will be resolved.
I've not yet seen anything from the core team about the naming and
coexistance issues.
So, consider this a "loud objection" unless these issues are resolved,
and just not yet communicated.
--
Randal L. Schwartz - Stonehenge Consulting Services, Inc. - +1 503 777 0095
<me...@stonehenge.com> <URL:http://www.stonehenge.com/merlyn/>
Perl/Unix/security consulting, Technical writing, Comedy, etc. etc.
See PerlTraining.Stonehenge.com for onsite and open-enrollment Perl training!
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@perl.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@perl.apache.org
Re: Time for RC4?
Posted by Geoffrey Young <ge...@modperlcookbook.org>.
Philippe M. Chiasson wrote:
> I think there has been enough important fixes since RC3 to make RC4.
>
> Unless anybody objects loudly, I'll be rolling out RC4 sometime tomorrow.
cool.
--Geoff
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@perl.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@perl.apache.org