On Tue, Nov 15, 2005 at 09:26:35AM -0600, kfogel@collab.net wrote:
> Garrett Rooney <rooneg@electricjellyfish.net> writes:
> > I believe it has not yet been officially released. Considering the
> > number of changes that have gone in to 1.3.x post rc2, I would suspect
> > a rc3 release sometime soon, so mid-to-late december seems pretty
> > likely to me.
>
> It's not the number of changes, it's their nature. If the changes to
> 1.3.x since RC2 are not for severe bugs, then they could wait until
> 1.3.1, and there would be no need for RC3. But if they are for severe
> bugs, then an RC3 would be needed.
>
True, we could just rename RC2 to final and be done with it. Trouble is,
we haven't released any 1.3.x RC publically yet, so we haven't got to
the point of being able to evaluate any feedback, much less exited the
soak period (or does the A.B.0 soak period start when we cut the RC
rather than when we release it?).
> Here are the significant changes merged into 1.3.x since RC2 was
> rolled from r17100. Do any seem worthy of an RC3 to us?
>
> * r17350 [merge of r17214]
> Fix crashes caused by reentrant calls into the Java bindings, and
> closing an initialisation-time race condition.
I don't know about the others, but I reviewed this one. It's a
significant, non-trivial change to the way the Java bindings work
internally, and a fix to a crash bug that should show up any time
you call back into the Java bindings as a result of a notification.
Fortunately, that doesn't appear too common, but Subclipse triggers it
(see http://svn.haxx.se/dev/archive-2005-11/0225.shtml).
I'd prefer to see it in 1.3.0 rather than 1.3.1, but only because it
feels a little too complex to slip into a bugfix release. The Java
bindings are still usable without it.
Regards,
Malcolm
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Tue Nov 15 18:31:37 2005