On 25.02.2015 12:30, Stefan Fuhrmann wrote: > On Tue, Feb 24, 2015 at 6:55 PM, Ben Reser <b...@reser.org > <mailto:b...@reser.org>> wrote: > > I'm still working on the CHANGES file for 1.9, it's taking longer > than I > anticipated since it's been roughly 9 months since we last did a > major update > (and I forgot how long that one took me). > > The original thinking for a beta was to get something moving while > we finished > up a few things we knew we wanted in 1.9 (svn info --show-item, > external > pinning). But I'm starting to think these things are close enough > that given > the time it's taking me to finish up CHANGES we may be ready for a > rc1 as soon > as those are done. > > > I think we should have a beta as soon as feasible instead of > waiting for a rc some time later and here is why: > > * Keep momentum in the 1.9 release process. > * Enable / trigger people to get their 1.9.x build setup finalized > > * Take off some of the pressure to complete & merge the > two candidate feature branches. > * Don't rush the "admin" work either, e.g. API review. > > * Concerning the extra effort, we will release 1.7.x, 1.8.x and > 1.9rc within a short window of time. Adding 1.9.0beta doesn't > seem to make it much worse.
+1 for all of the above reasons. There is one rather large-ish reason to not roll a beta: our release process isn't exactly automated, there's a lot of manual fiddling involved for the RM. It would be nice if someone volunteered to help Ben with the releases, at least we could split these 4 in to 2x2. -- Brane
