Delaying 1.5 branch till Monday?

[Blair Zajac <bl...@orcaware.com>]

I've been seeing a large amount of commits go into the tree this week :)

I'm wondering if people are in the same boat as me, almost finished with a 
feature and want to get it in before the branch.  I won't be able to take the 
time to put the final polish (including writing a good log message) on relative 
externals until Saturday, definitely by Sunday night, so I'd rather not go 
through the voting procedure to get it merged into the branch.

BTW, the work has been checked into a checkpoint:

http://svn.collab.net/repos/svn/checkpoints/relative-externals

if anybody wants to take a look.  A review would be appreciated.

Blair

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org

Re: Delaying 1.5 branch till Monday?

[John Peacock <jo...@havurah-software.org>]

Blair Zajac wrote:
> I've been seeing a large amount of commits go into the tree this week :)
> 
> I'm wondering if people are in the same boat as me, almost finished with
> a feature and want to get it in before the branch.  I won't be able to
> take the time to put the final polish (including writing a good log
> message) on relative externals until Saturday, definitely by Sunday
> night, so I'd rather not go through the voting procedure to get it
> merged into the branch.

I would certainly prefer to hold off until after the weekend.  I've been trying
to work through the perl-bindings-improvements branch, and I'm discovering that
what Nik has done so far is incomplete.  There is also a test failure that I am
trying to track down.  Both Nik and I have changed jobs since we agreed to work
on this branch, and I fear we are both feeling a little overcommitted (I know I am).


+1 from this particular peanut gallery...

John

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org

Re: Delaying 1.5 branch till Monday?

[Karl Fogel <kf...@red-bean.com>]

+1 on a checkpoints discussion if people want to have it, but could
you rethread to start it, please?  It's not really about 1.5.

Thanks,
-K

"Justin Erenkrantz" <ju...@erenkrantz.com> writes:
> On Oct 11, 2007 9:38 PM, Blair Zajac <bl...@orcaware.com> wrote:
>> BTW, the work has been checked into a checkpoint:
>>
>> http://svn.collab.net/repos/svn/checkpoints/relative-externals
>>
>> if anybody wants to take a look.  A review would be appreciated.
>
> See...this is why I think checkpoints are silly.  On one hand, you
> don't want reviews; on the other hand, you do.  I don't get it.
>
> How am I supposed to easily review changes without diffs?  Now, I have
> to go do a URL diff from trunk to checkpoints/relative-externals to
> hunt through the diffs?  No thanks.
>
> I guess I'd be much happier if the commit messages on 'checkpoints'
> still included diffs.  If it's a social problem we're trying to solve,
> solve it socially (ask people to not send nit-pick comments) rather
> than turning off a very important feature.  -- justin
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org

Re: Delaying 1.5 branch till Monday?

[Justin Erenkrantz <ju...@erenkrantz.com>]

On Oct 11, 2007 9:38 PM, Blair Zajac <bl...@orcaware.com> wrote:
> BTW, the work has been checked into a checkpoint:
>
> http://svn.collab.net/repos/svn/checkpoints/relative-externals
>
> if anybody wants to take a look.  A review would be appreciated.

See...this is why I think checkpoints are silly.  On one hand, you
don't want reviews; on the other hand, you do.  I don't get it.

How am I supposed to easily review changes without diffs?  Now, I have
to go do a URL diff from trunk to checkpoints/relative-externals to
hunt through the diffs?  No thanks.

I guess I'd be much happier if the commit messages on 'checkpoints'
still included diffs.  If it's a social problem we're trying to solve,
solve it socially (ask people to not send nit-pick comments) rather
than turning off a very important feature.  -- justin

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org

Re: Delaying 1.5 branch till Monday?

[Ben Collins-Sussman <su...@red-bean.com>]

On 10/12/07, Mark Phippard <ma...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Just to clarify my position, since I threw out October 12th as a date.
> Today is supposed to be a goal, not a deadline.  We still want to
> apply the same standards we have always applied in doing a release.  I
> think we need to try to take stock of where we are today.  List out
> the additional work that should be done before we branch, and set a
> new goal based on that list.

Amen!

Here's where things stand with me:  I've been focused all week on
weeding out bugs and last-minute enhancements to my three new
features:  {copy-on-update, changelists, interactive-conflicts}.

  * Changelists are all set, save for some docs in the releasenotes.

  * Copy-on-update is finished, but one of the three new tests
(update-test 38) is failing over both neon and serf, so I'm
investigating that now.  I've documented this new enhancement in the
releasenotes.

  * Interactive-conflicts are almost done:  I'm going to extend the
conflict-description structures and callback APIs to deal with
property conflicts today.

Realistically, what loose ends I don't finish up today I'll finish
over the weekend.  Come next week, I need to get back to focusing on
internal Google work full-time, so my involvement will drop back down
to mere participation in discussions & testing as we prepare for an
RC1 tarball.

So if we *do* decide to branch on Monday, my stuff should be ready for that.

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org

Re: Delaying 1.5 branch till Monday?

["C. Michael Pilato" <cm...@collab.net>]

Mark Phippard wrote:
> I'll start the ball rolling.  We need to update CHANGES and it'd be
> great if people looked at and updated the release notes HTML.  This
> has been such a long release, updating this sort of stuff is going to
> be a bitch.  I'll try to help on the release notes, but I think
> CHANGES is too big a task for me to take on.  I'll certainly review it
> though.  I have mostly been focused on testing some of the recent
> changes and have a few more to do still.

I'm still working on issue #2953 (normalization of merge tracking sources).
 I have the easiest of the four RA implementations of the necessary RA API
finished, and need to complete the other three.  And then I need to teach
the merge (and mergeinfo query) logic to use it.  A non-trivial amount of
work, to be sure.

-- 
C. Michael Pilato <cm...@collab.net>
CollabNet   <>   www.collab.net   <>   Distributed Development On Demand

Re: Delaying 1.5 branch till Monday?

[Karl Fogel <kf...@red-bean.com>]

"Mark Phippard" <ma...@gmail.com> writes:
> Just to clarify my position, since I threw out October 12th as a date.
> Today is supposed to be a goal, not a deadline.  We still want to
> apply the same standards we have always applied in doing a release.  I
> think we need to try to take stock of where we are today.  List out
> the additional work that should be done before we branch, and set a
> new goal based on that list.
>
> There are a lot of committers headed to Munich in the next couple days
> too, so we need to be realistic about how much work can get done over
> the next week.  Maybe a bunch of them will get together in Munich next
> week and make some progress (I'd suggest they just drink beer and blow
> off some steam).

Those of us in Munich are not going to get much coding work done for a
week (just being realistic).

I'm hoping to have issue #2959 (and therefore its dependency #695)
done today.  #2951 should just be a review-&-close.  That's all the
known sparse-directories issues, but a lot of compatibility testing
remains to be done, and we'll probably uncover bugs then.

So I wouldn't mind more time on sparse-dirs, but next week is going to
be mostly a wash for coding -- though it may be very good for
in-person discussions of technical problems.

-Karl

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org

Re: Delaying 1.5 branch till Monday?

[Mark Phippard <ma...@gmail.com>]

On 10/12/07, Blair Zajac <bl...@orcaware.com> wrote:
> I've been seeing a large amount of commits go into the tree this week :)
>
> I'm wondering if people are in the same boat as me, almost finished with a
> feature and want to get it in before the branch.  I won't be able to take the
> time to put the final polish (including writing a good log message) on relative
> externals until Saturday, definitely by Sunday night, so I'd rather not go
> through the voting procedure to get it merged into the branch.
>
> BTW, the work has been checked into a checkpoint:
>
> http://svn.collab.net/repos/svn/checkpoints/relative-externals
>
> if anybody wants to take a look.  A review would be appreciated.

Just to clarify my position, since I threw out October 12th as a date.
Today is supposed to be a goal, not a deadline.  We still want to
apply the same standards we have always applied in doing a release.  I
think we need to try to take stock of where we are today.  List out
the additional work that should be done before we branch, and set a
new goal based on that list.

There are a lot of committers headed to Munich in the next couple days
too, so we need to be realistic about how much work can get done over
the next week.  Maybe a bunch of them will get together in Munich next
week and make some progress (I'd suggest they just drink beer and blow
off some steam).

The real goal (at least in my mind) is to get a GA release out before
the end of the year.  Today is a step along that path.  There are only
11 weeks left in the year.  We know the release process will be 6-8
weeks at best.  So ideally, we could have the branch created and the
RC1 tarball signed in 2-3 weeks so that we have a shot at meeting this
goal.

Anyway, I do not see us as ready to create the branch today.  Most
likely not Monday either.  If we still want to accomplish something
today then let's make it be declaring what work remains to be done,
who can do it, and when it can be done.  We can then set the next goal
date.

I'll start the ball rolling.  We need to update CHANGES and it'd be
great if people looked at and updated the release notes HTML.  This
has been such a long release, updating this sort of stuff is going to
be a bitch.  I'll try to help on the release notes, but I think
CHANGES is too big a task for me to take on.  I'll certainly review it
though.  I have mostly been focused on testing some of the recent
changes and have a few more to do still.

-- 
Thanks

Mark Phippard
http://markphip.blogspot.com/

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org