On 4/4/07, Martijn Dashorst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 4/4/07, Bertrand Delacretaz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> If there have been changes since the release was cut, a new release
> must IMHO be created, so that people can vote (on the wicket lists
> first, and then come back here) on the correct one.
Like Gwyn said, we'd rather wait until *all* feedback is delivered,
before starting a spam action on this list to get the release vetted.
If we need to build, test and upload a new release for each
discrepancy found then the process needs fixing.
Given the lack of time of one of the most trustworthy IPMC members,
i trust all IPMC members: it's not a question of trust but of release
management experience and energy.
also, using RAT makes a huge difference. IPMCers would don't use RAT
find it really hard to check large codebases they haven't helped to
develop. the problem is that RAT is incomplete (and i'm not finding
the cycles right now to push RAT to where it needs to go) and
undocumented so it's much easier for me to use than anyone else.
(BTW if anyone wants to help out on RAT, it would be really appreciated :-)
this checking takes longer than expected, but we are willing to wait
(not too long, mind you) until we get more feedback.
good friday is a holiday here in sunny bradford so i'm taking a look
at this now (or at least starting to work on the tools i need). i
expect to have the review completed today.
- robert
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
