[svn.haxx.se] · SVN Dev · SVN Users · SVN Org · TSVN Dev · TSVN Users · Subclipse Dev · Subclipse Users · this month's index

Re: Releasing 1.6

From: Blair Zajac <blair_at_orcaware.com>
Date: Thu, 07 Aug 2008 10:20:19 -0700

Stefan Sperling wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 07, 2008 at 10:20:42AM +0200, Stefan Sperling wrote:
>> On Wed, Aug 06, 2008 at 10:15:30PM -0700, Hyrum K. Wright wrote:
>>> [moving this to dev@ - apologies to those joining us mid-program]
>> It's lacking one important bit of context (see below).
>>>> On Thu, Aug 7, 2008 at 5:19 AM, Justin Erenkrantz <justin_at_erenkrantz.com> wrote:
>>>>> Let's just create 1.6 *today* that has that feature and move on.
>>>>> There is no reason that we need to wait six months to get this feature
>>>>> in the hands of our users.
>>>>> Now, that said, since CollabNet apparently really wants to see this
>>>>> feature out,
>> Which feature?
> Right, now that I found the corresponding thread on the
> svn-full-committers mailing list, I can answer this myself:
> The desired features are the improvements made to the authentication
> credentials caching behaviour, including the plaintext password prompt,
> gnome-keyring and KDEwallet support, and the encrypted caching of SSL
> client certificate passphrases.
> But that does not really matter.
> The real question is whether we want to cut 1.6 sooner rather
> than later, with the current set of completed features in trunk.
> That is, whether we want to shorten the planned period of time
> between major releases for this release cycle because there is
> demand for some features which are already in trunk, and which
> are more or less completed.

I need to get the file externals work into 1.6 which isn't completed yet, but
should be done soon. So I don't want to see a release with out this feature.

> Another issue that comes to mind is whether we can really afford
> to phase out 1.5.x that quickly. Not everyone will want to upgrade
> again in a few weeks time because 1.6 is out. Do we want to maintain
> two backport branches, 1.5.x and 1.6.x, at least for a while?
> If so, can we afford the workload of doing this?
> OTOH , I'd expect the 1.5 -> 1.6 transition to be relatively
> painless for most users given the relatively small changeset,
> so this may not really be much of an issue.

The file externals work will bump the wc format number.


To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe_at_subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help_at_subversion.tigris.org
Received on 2008-08-07 19:20:35 CEST

This is an archived mail posted to the Subversion Dev mailing list.

This site is subject to the Apache Privacy Policy and the Apache Public Forum Archive Policy.