Hi!
On 2018-07-19, Jeroen Demeyer wrote:
> C) Don't keep a strict time table, but announce at some point during the
> beta releases when you plan to cut off the merge window.
I haven't been release manager, but it seems to me that C) is a good
solution both for the release manager and the fello
On Thu, Jul 19, 2018 at 11:19 AM Jeroen Demeyer wrote:
>
> On 2018-07-19 11:04, Sébastien Labbé wrote:
> > The definition of "blocker" ticket must be adapted to the release
> > calendar we choose to have.
>
> I really disagree with this. I think it's important that the calender is
> adjusted depen
On Thu, Jul 19, 2018 at 10:23 AM Volker Braun wrote:
>
> On Thursday, July 19, 2018 at 10:16:46 AM UTC+2, Erik Bray wrote:
>>
>> If there's a fix for a known issue there's no reason to exclude it
>> from a release.
>
>
> Look at it this way, we are delaying hundreds of tickets by a week to fix
>
On 2018-07-19 11:04, Sébastien Labbé wrote:
The definition of "blocker" ticket must be adapted to the release
calendar we choose to have.
I really disagree with this. I think it's important that the calender is
adjusted depending on blocker tickets, not the other way around.
--
You received
> We must be using different definitions of "blocker" then. Just
> because a bug doesn't prevent development from continuing does not
> mean it isn't a *release* blocker. Any bug that introduces
> regressions into the test suite should be a blocker if it means not
> being able to release a
On Thu, Jul 19, 2018 at 1:05 AM William Stein wrote:
>
> On Wed, Jul 18, 2018 at 3:24 PM, Volker Braun wrote:
> > Since Erik is clamoring for a more calendar-driven release schedule, here is
> > a quick A/B test:
> >
> > A) Keep the current process of releasing approximately every 3 months,
> > l
On Thu, Jul 19, 2018 at 10:09 AM Volker Braun wrote:
>
> On Thursday, July 19, 2018 at 8:50:12 AM UTC+2, Jeroen Demeyer wrote:
>>
>> C) Don't keep a strict time table, but announce at some point during the
>> beta releases when you plan to cut off the merge window.
>
>
> Thats a bit of a cop out,
I am fine with statu quo, so I vote for A).
That being said, I think the weight of the vote of the release manager
should be higher than mine.
Sébastien
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"sage-devel" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop rec
On Thu, Jul 19, 2018 at 8:50 AM Jeroen Demeyer wrote:
>
> On 2018-07-19 00:24, Volker Braun wrote:
> > Since Erik is clamoring for a more calendar-driven release schedule,
> > here is a quick A/B test:
> >
> > A) Keep the current process of releasing approximately every 3 months,
> > longer if peo
On Thursday, July 19, 2018 at 10:16:46 AM UTC+2, Erik Bray wrote:
>
> If there's a fix for a known issue there's no reason to exclude it
> from a release.
>
Look at it this way, we are delaying hundreds of tickets by a week to fix
your pet bug 3 months earlier. Of course you can forever argue a
On Thu, Jul 19, 2018 at 12:07 AM Volker Braun wrote:
>
> On Wednesday, July 18, 2018 at 1:34:56 PM UTC+2, Erik Bray wrote:
>>
>> As I wrote previously, I made this fix back in April,
>> but tabled getting the fix directly into Sage since I thought it would
>> be no big deal to make a Cysignals rel
On Wed, Jul 18, 2018 at 11:53 PM Timo Kaufmann wrote:
>
> As one small data point I can say that I already upgraded cysignals in
> nixpkgs (tested Linux, although it could technically be used on other
> platforms too). I didn't run into any obvious issues.
>
> I also think we should merge that u
On Thursday, July 19, 2018 at 8:50:12 AM UTC+2, Jeroen Demeyer wrote:
>
> C) Don't keep a strict time table, but announce at some point during the
> beta releases when you plan to cut off the merge window.
>
Thats a bit of a cop out, what do you mean by "at some point"?
This time I wrote in the
On Wed, Jul 18, 2018 at 11:44 PM Volker Braun wrote:
>
> On Wednesday, July 18, 2018 at 1:34:56 PM UTC+2, Erik Bray wrote:
>>
>> All that said, your claim that this is a "high-risk" upgrade is also
>> highly specious. This is upgrading Cysignals from 1.7.1 to 1.7.2 [1]
>> which contains a couple
On Wed, Jul 18, 2018 at 11:21 PM Jeroen Demeyer wrote:
>
> On 2018-07-18 13:34, Erik Bray wrote:
> > This is again specious, and needlessly disparaging and antagonistic.
> > I don't believe if takes 2 weeks to run CI tests
>
> Just replying on this point: the problem is that many things are not
>
On Wed, Jul 18, 2018 at 11:56 PM Volker Braun wrote:
>
> There is nothing particularly newsworthy about the buildbot setup, at the end
> of the day it essentially just calls "make start" and "sage -t --all". I
> don't think having more detail is going to be of any help in setting up a
> buildbo
On 2018-07-19 08:50, Jeroen Demeyer wrote:
> On 2018-07-19 00:24, Volker Braun wrote:
>> Since Erik is clamoring for a more calendar-driven release schedule,
>> here is a quick A/B test:
>>
>> A) Keep the current process of releasing approximately every 3 months,
>> longer if people insist on havin
17 matches
Mail list logo
