On 2011-05-23 20:25, Hyrum K Wright wrote: > On Mon, May 23, 2011 at 11:05 AM, C. Michael Pilato > <cmpil...@collab.net>wrote: [...] >> I do have a question, though, about a portion of that report: >> >> The good news is: after the extensive rewrite of Subversion's working >> copy library has completed, a release branch will be created within a >> month, and the first release candidate is expected in August 2011. >> >> I didn't get the sense at the hackathon that there were enough documented >> blocker issues to delay our putting out our first release candidate for >> another *three months*. Did I miss some critical discussion on Friday? >> Did >> I simply misunderstand the discussions we had earlier in the week? Are >> there some blockers that are living in peoples' minds and *not* in the >> tracker (aka "poor collaboration and communication")? Was the write-up >> just >> a mistake, and August is actually the *release* target date? > > I noticed that bit of prose as well, and just chalked it up to > an overzealous PR guy.
Sorry, it's a mistake alright. The "PR guys" were rushing the PR stuff on Friday. This bit of incongruous information apparently slipped through. > The outcome of the hackathon was "we'll start alpha releases in June and > branch when the blockers are gone" We'll change that paragraph to read: The good news is: after the extensive rewrite of Subversion's working copy library has completed, we can expect alpha releases in June, to be followed by the creation of a release branch, once the remaining release blockers have been resolved. -- Michael Diers, elego Software Solutions GmbH, http://www.elego.de
