Hi David, Am Sonntag, den 01.03.2020, 14:28 +0100 schrieb David Kastrup: > Recently I asked the list to consider not putting any changes in master > right now where we'd like to be able to figure out whether they are > "introduced after 2.21.0" or not. At least with regard to build system > changes but likely also some other ones, it's probably safe to say that > this ship has sailed. > > In order to get out a timely 2.21.0 reference, however, the original > plan still is not to merge translations (in order to avoid another > unforeseeable holdup) and release basically immediately (which will > likely amount to a week) after 2.20.0. The desire for 2.21.0 to serve > as a reference point is still there, so if people could hold up anything > that has the chance to render 2.21.0 into something that will not > compile or work for a significant number of use cases, that would > improve our chances to make it such a reference point. > > It would be really unfortunate if we had to hold up on merging > translations and thus paving the ground for a large catchup of the > translators to the master branch for longer than it takes to get out > 2.21.0 as a reference point for the start of the 2.21 series. > > So please, for any commits to staging in the next week, consider that > they may be part of 2.21.0 without further correction. 2.21.0 is > certainly not as seminal a point as 2.20.0 and people using unstable > releases are strongly encouraged to frequently update. But for the sake > of a nice start-off, I think it would be nice to consider it with > somewhat less levity than, say, 2.21.37 (assuming that we don't cut 2.22 > before reaching there). > > Thank you for your understanding!
could you maybe flag those patches under review that you think should not go in? I guess everybody considers the own changes to be "important", so I'm not 100% sure which patches fall under that category. That's maybe also due to lack of knowledge what has caused problems in the past. For example, I'd very much like #5799 to be part of 2.21.0 to be able to cross-compile to x86_64-w64-mingw32 and show-case a replacement for GUB. However I acknowledge that the changes have at least the potential to break the current process using GUB. Jonas
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
