On 2021-12-12 15:18, Scott Kostyshak wrote:
On Sun, Dec 12, 2021 at 02:55:51PM +0100, Daniel wrote:
On 2021-12-10 06:52, Richard Kimberly Heck wrote:
On 12/9/21 03:00, Daniel wrote:
On 2021-12-07 23:04, Richard Kimberly Heck wrote:
On 12/6/21 22:00, Daniel wrote:
On 2021-12-06 22:58, Richard Kimberly Heck wrote:
Do you mean by "safe enough to include" that they
should be more or less done? For example, there were
a couple of tickets where you said that you take a
look at while there were things that needed to be
done still. I take it that this is not going to
happen, right?
Safe as in: Not likely to cause bugs we need to solve
before the release. Once we hit beta, we are in
bug-fixing mode, and the fewer the better.
Riki
Okay. (Though it is not what I have expected beta to be. I
would have thought that software in beta is actually
"likely" to have bug rather than unlikely. I would have
thought the latter is release candidate.)
Well, we know beta will have bugs---indeed, we know of some
already---but the idea is that we do our best not to create new
bugs at that point. New features bring new bugs. That's why beta
release goes with feature freeze.
That said, at the moment we're talking about what will make it
into beta, so some risk is all right.
Riki
I have to do the tickets one by one. Should I post them here (with
reference) on the list, create a (temporary) meta bug with the list
of tickets, or just ping you on the tickets themselves?
Maybe assemble a list of them, and then post it here. I'll see it, I hope!
You could also add a 'triage' keyword to the bugs themselves. I've used
that for this kind of purpose.
Riki
Here is a list of enhancements with milestone 2.4.0 and patches. I guess it
is worthwhile to go though them anyway and either apply or re-target them:
https://www.lyx.org/trac/query?status=accepted&status=assigned&status=new&status=reopened&description=~&reporter=~&summary=~&milestone=2.4.0&keywords=~patch&type=enhancement&col=id&col=summary&col=keywords&col=reporter&col=status&col=type&col=severity&desc=1&order=id
Thanks, Daniel. I will try to find time to take a look at one or two of
those next week.
I will not manage to do more than give you this list. Maybe you just ask me
if something is unclear that seems more efficient since you will look at
them carefully anyway? I could also give more info on them but that is as
much as I can do for this weekend. (Maybe I missed the road map but some
warning would have been helpful a bit in advance.
This release cycle is a bit crazy due to unusual circumstances. At this
point I think the idea for 2.4.0 is to "get it out" without being as
careful or methodical as we usually are. That is just my opinion though.
That said, I can understand your frustration since you've put in so much
work and you have not gotten timely reviews and it would be a shame not
to see a lot of your work in 2.4.0. All I can say is "thank you"
sincerely for your work and "I'm sorry" for not helping with reviewing
your patches.
I guess it was
communicated on some internal list.)
Nothing on the internal list. The internal list is rarely used and
certainly not for release-related issues.
Scott
Thanks. That is all fine. No worries!
As far as I understand how it works with LyX development currently is
that people work more or less on their own on things they have a rather
good grip of with only minor reviews (because of
time/priorities/interest). I often have quite unfinished patches,
especially when it comes to new features because of my limited
programming knowledge (e.g. I never got my head around creating lyx2lyx
when a file format change is involved even though people keep telling me
how easy it is) and because I don't want to spend too much time on
something people might not like or that I will have to do partly again
because someone else's patch interferes (and I am not particularly good
with git either). So, my expectations concerning my patches are
naturally low (though I sometimes get carried away if I like something).
All I wanted to do is explain why things are as they are from my side
and lower the risk a bit that a feature patch that might actually be a
good idea for 2.4.0 gets just overlooked.
Daniel
--
lyx-devel mailing list
lyx-devel@lists.lyx.org
http://lists.lyx.org/mailman/listinfo/lyx-devel
