On Tue, Jul 12, 2011 at 12:22 PM, Hyrum K Wright <hy...@hyrumwright.org> wrote: > On Tue, Jul 12, 2011 at 9:42 AM, Hyrum K Wright <hy...@hyrumwright.org> wrote: >> On Tue, Jul 12, 2011 at 9:32 AM, C. Michael Pilato <cmpil...@collab.net> >> wrote: >>> The issue tracker currently has *no* non-Serf-related blocker issues open. >>> Per prior agreement, this effectively means that there are no known >>> blockers, as we have a contingency plan for Serf already (un-default it). I >>> realize that we'd like to see the tracker sit quiet (blocker-wise) for a >>> week or so before saying "ship the RC", but I think we need to face some >>> realities: >>> >>> - blocker-class bugs can -- and will -- crop up after we branch. >>> >>> - blocker-class bugs can -- and will -- crop up after we release, >>> for that matter! >>> >>> - there seems to be more dev activity on 1.8-aimed feature branches >>> than on the trunk. Our "merge pain" threshold has shifted. >>> >>> So, with all of this in mind, I propose that we immediately branch 1.7.x and >>> release beta-1. We than allow an extra week before we fire off RC1 -- we >>> need to ensure that CHANGES and any other release administrivia get wrapped >>> up anyway. >>> >>> What to do about Serf? I'd like to think that Greg could wrap up his work >>> on the single remaining blocking issue in the next week or so. I've already >>> heard (via Hyrum) that he's essentially finished with the work, and just >>> testing his changes at this point. I do not know, though, what the status >>> of the Serf 1.0 release is, which I *thought* was also a pre-requisite for >>> making available many of the recent blocker-related fixes. (Greg?) >>> >>> Anyway, I'm *not* proposing that we immediately revert to Neon as the >>> default after branching. That week of beta gives Greg (or whoever) one last >>> chance to save the day for Serf. But I strongly feel that we as a community >>> need to declare an RC1 date and stick with it in the absence of absolutely >>> critical failures in Subversion. The fuzzy release date thing is great for >>> the first, oh, two years of a release. But let's get on with it, already. >>> >>> So, to clarify, I'm proposing the following: >>> >>> * Branch 1.7.x now. >>> * Release beta-1 immediately after branching. >>> * Make a go/no-go call on Serf 7 days from now. >>> * Release rc-1 after making (and acting on, if necessary) the Serf >>> go/no-go call. >>> >>> What say we? >> >> I agree with the above. >> >> One question that I have is regarding housekeeping. Do we have any >> actions which should be done on trunk (file renames, whitespace >> cleaning, mergeinfo pruning, etc), which will improve our experience >> when merging to the branch? > > Because I'm a nice guy (and to allow people time to comment), I'll > wait until tomorrow morning to create the branch, but plan on it then.
+1 on branching tomorrow. Undecided on whether Hyrum is a nice guy :-P
