Greg Stein <gstein@lyra.org> writes:
> Euh. It is end of day Tuesday. There are two branches corresponding to
> issues 1429 and 1578. Each of these are large, structural changes to the
> operation of Subversion, and neither has been merged.
>
> I *really* don't think it is a good idea to merge them a day or two before
> release. I believe they need some "soak time" before hitting the public at
> large. And especially bad to call that release "beta" after such a short
> period of "in-trunk-ness".
>
> IMO, keep 0.33 as an alpha. Do the branch merges *just after* 0.33 is
> released. If you can release 0.33 today/tomorrow [because 0.33 won't be
> held for these merges], then just fine. Then call 0.34 the beta, after
> there has been adequate soak time.
Heh, yes, You're so quite right about not calling it "beta" before
soak time. I'm being overeager :-), thanks for the head check.
About delaying both merges, I'm not so sure... ?
For #1429, part of merging these changes into trunk is testing old
client against new server, new client against old server, and 'make
check' with the new code of course. If it passes all that, then the
wider community is the next logical step (we do have patch-level
releases in case something is still wrong, after all). And if it
doesn't pass all that, then of course it won't go into 0.33 or
anything else until it's fixed :-).
The #1578 have been extensively scrutinized and run through a ringer
of automated tests by Mike and others. I'm not saying there's zero
risk, but I don't think it's as high as might be expected.
Still, there's certainly something worrying about putting both a
client/server protocol change *and* an fs schema change into one
release... But maybe we should merge one now and wait on the other.
Well, sleeping on it,
zzzzz,
-K
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Wed Nov 12 07:18:23 2003