2.0.56 candidate coming soon

[Colm MacCarthaigh <co...@stdlib.net>]

As the last blocker to a 2.0.x release has now cleared, I'm going to
make good on my offer and finally roll a candidate. Apart from the
licensing blocker, 2.0.x has been in good shape for about 3 months now,
and even tests clean.

I'm not sure if I'm stepping on anyone's toes here, if I am, I don't
mean to be, I can remember a few different abandonded potential releases
at this point, I just wanna get the basic fixes out there.

The original plan, from some months ago, is that we would release the
next 2.0.x and 2.2.x releases in close proximity, to try and avoid 2.2
users downgrading without knowing any better. 2.2 looks in a releaseable
state, but I havn't been tracking it as closely, but might that still be
a possibility?

Though I am mindful that the last time we got to this stage, an annoying
showstopper came along, so who knows ;)

-- 
Colm MacCárthaigh                        Public Key: colm+pgp@stdlib.net

Re: 2.0.56 candidate coming soon

["William A. Rowe, Jr." <wr...@rowe-clan.net>]

Colm MacCarthaigh wrote:
> 
> I'm not sure if I'm stepping on anyone's toes here, if I am, I don't
> mean to be, I can remember a few different abandonded potential releases
> at this point, I just wanna get the basic fixes out there.

Of course not :)  Holiday weekend and all - if you are ready before me than
by all means, be my guest!  In fact, the project's rules are specifically set
up that more than one RM could roll a competing package (better or worse) which
is why the package release rules are written the way they are.

Re: 2.0.56 candidate coming soon

[Colm MacCarthaigh <co...@stdlib.net>]

On Sun, Apr 16, 2006 at 06:58:50PM +0100, Colm MacCarthaigh wrote:
> On Sun, Apr 16, 2006 at 06:52:05PM +0100, Colm MacCarthaigh wrote:
> > Hmm, I'm getting pointed at a thread titled "any undocumented
> > showstoppers for 2.0.56", but it's not in my mailbox yet.
> 
> While I go find out why I havn't received a fair bit of mail, I've read
> the thread online, and PR 39275 is not even close to a showstopper imo.

Found them now, turns out procmail can be very senstive to my typos,
erk. O.k., well I've committed what I had lying around, and I'll tag and
roll a candidate anyway, on the grounds that at the moment it looks like
I can only be saving someone effort.

-- 
Colm MacCárthaigh                        Public Key: colm+pgp@stdlib.net

Re: 2.0.56 candidate coming soon

[Colm MacCarthaigh <co...@stdlib.net>]

On Sun, Apr 16, 2006 at 06:52:05PM +0100, Colm MacCarthaigh wrote:
> Hmm, I'm getting pointed at a thread titled "any undocumented
> showstoppers for 2.0.56", but it's not in my mailbox yet.

While I go find out why I havn't received a fair bit of mail, I've read
the thread online, and PR 39275 is not even close to a showstopper imo.

-- 
Colm MacCárthaigh                        Public Key: colm+pgp@stdlib.net

Re: 2.0.56 candidate coming soon

[Colm MacCarthaigh <co...@stdlib.net>]

Hmm, I'm getting pointed at a thread titled "any undocumented
showstoppers for 2.0.56", but it's not in my mailbox yet.

On Sun, Apr 16, 2006 at 06:48:25PM +0100, Colm MacCarthaigh wrote:
> As the last blocker to a 2.0.x release has now cleared, I'm going to
> make good on my offer and finally roll a candidate. Apart from the
> licensing blocker, 2.0.x has been in good shape for about 3 months now,
> and even tests clean.
> 
> I'm not sure if I'm stepping on anyone's toes here, if I am, I don't
> mean to be, I can remember a few different abandonded potential releases
> at this point, I just wanna get the basic fixes out there.
> 
> The original plan, from some months ago, is that we would release the
> next 2.0.x and 2.2.x releases in close proximity, to try and avoid 2.2
> users downgrading without knowing any better. 2.2 looks in a releaseable
> state, but I havn't been tracking it as closely, but might that still be
> a possibility?
> 
> Though I am mindful that the last time we got to this stage, an annoying
> showstopper came along, so who knows ;)
> 
> -- 
> Colm MacCárthaigh                        Public Key: colm+pgp@stdlib.net
> 

-- 
Colm MacCárthaigh                        Public Key: colm+pgp@stdlib.net