On 26 Jun 2009, at 19:59, Lukas Kahwe Smith wrote:
On 26.06.2009, at 20:26, Pierre Joye <pierre....@gmail.com> wrote:
On Fri, Jun 26, 2009 at 7:30 PM, Scott MacVicar<sc...@macvicar.net>
wrote:
On 26 Jun 2009, at 16:26, Lukas Kahwe Smith wrote:
Aloha,
So the last fix is just being prepared for a commit and so we
will be
tagging 5.3.0 soon.
We would like to up hold the commit freeze until 5.3.0 is
announced next
Tuesday.
This freeze that you guys have implemented is frustrating, just
branch 5_3
into a release branch and Johannes can take selective fixes from
5_3 as
needed.
We all know your reasons for the freeze and agree with it but
holding up
regular development is a PITA.
It is not holding up development. It is about getting a viable
release
cycle and to give us the minimum safety to release 5.3.1 in a
reasonable time frame. Please explain me what's wrong to allow only
bug fixes for this phase?
Also please note that we have HEAD for all the developments and new
features.
Exactly.
I will do my best to track things that need to be merged. Best is to
note if something needs to be merged.
But if you all feel it's such a huge burden then you can of course
insist on putting the burden on the RMs. The fact of the matter is
that our current infrastructure is not fit for providing both sides
with an efficient solution.
If we're freezing some more after this release for the SVN conversion
then we could have a pretty cold branch for another week or so.
As I've already said, I agree with only allow verified bug fixes by
Johannes into 5.3.0. it's this extra bureaucracy that is getting added
on top that's sucking hard.
I don't want to leave it up to someone else to merge it into 5.3, I
should be doing it myself. It's possible that things could get
accidentally missed wen someone else is applying it.
Scott
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
