Karl Fogel wrote:
> "Mark Phippard" <markphip_at_gmail.com> writes:
>> So. With this in mind, where do we stand towards a beta release of this
>> codebase? I'm not talking release candidate necessarily, but are we ready
>> to put *something* official out there in users' hands? (And on our own
>> svn.collab.net box?) Are folks wanting instead to hold off for a real RC1?
>
> I think we probably could cut alpha1 this week. IMHO the one after
> that should be beta1 (unless there's any pressing reason to call it
> alpha2). After we've got any big problems (based on tester feedback)
> cleared away, we should move right to the RC series, as described in
> http://subversion.tigris.org/hacking.html#release-stabilization.
+1 How does Thursday sound for the first alpha?
> Here's what remains to be done for alpha:
>
> * Review and voting on porting these changes to 1.5.x:
> + issue #3089 changes (detect repository mergeinfo capability)
> + r29155 (let packagers build some of svn against installed libs)
> + changes to fix 'log -g'.
The 'log -g' functionality is there, and nominated for backport. I'm
working on improving the memory usage and run time, but those shouldn't
be blockers for -alpha1.
> + support Neon 0.28
>
> * Issue #2986 (copy-on-update loggy behaviors)
> I'm working on this right now, with help from glasser, who
> already did most of the issue (just some prop stuff left)
>
> * Issue #2973 (revert of a changeset rX on a target with merge
> history from same target does not work)
> I have no idea what this is about, except for the summary above :-).
> pburba, you're the assignee: should this stay in 1.5, and if so,
> what's left to do?
>
> * Issue #3034 (update mergeinfo-filled dump file, fix any test failures)
> hwright seems mostly done with this; Hyrum?
Done and closed.
> We should expect to be in RC-land for an unusually long time for this
> release. There's going to be a lot of user feedback, they've been
> waiting a while for this :-).
Received on 2008-02-18 19:45:24 CET