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

RE: Time to branch 1.9

From: Bert Huijben <bert_at_qqmail.nl>
Date: Sun, 15 Feb 2015 01:03:37 +0100

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Branko Čibej [mailto:brane_at_wandisco.com]
> Sent: donderdag 12 februari 2015 11:13
> To: Subversion Development
> Subject: Re: Time to branch 1.9
>
> On 16.01.2015 11:06, Branko Čibej wrote:
> > A couple months down the line, and I'd like to make another call for
> > creating the 1.9 release branch. AFAICS the x509 branch still needs
> > merging if we want it in 1.9 (which I think we do, since IIUC trunk
> > currently does not handle all certs correctly).
> >
> > Anything else?
> >
> > I'd like to propose that we cut the branch and roll an RC (or a beta) in
> > a couple weeks.
>
>
> Looks like we're on track for branching around the beginning of next week.
>
> * the x509 branch is on trunk;
> * the heisenbug (actually, several heisenbugs) in ra-test seem to have
> been fixed;
> * Stefan^1 's pin-externals branch has been lazy-consensus'd for merge
> to trunk (some changes still pending, but those don't have to happen
> on the branch);
> * The problem with Python bindings and Swig 3.0.x is, for now, assumed
> to be a bug in Swig itself; I propose we disable support for Swig-3
> for now (Swig-2 still works fine);
> * Ivan and I agreed not to propose to merge the reuse-ra-session
> branch in time for 1.9, we can merge it after the soak period an let
> it marinate a bit on trunk for 1.10;
> * Bert appears to be mostly finished with his (fantastic!) fixes for
> working copy move handling and conflict resolution;
> * buildbots are green.
>
> If there are no further objections, and the pin-externals branch gets
> merged soon-ish, I intend to create the 1.9 release branch on Sunday
> night or Monday early morning (UTC). Ben has kindly been volunteered to
> RM the first 1.9 release candidate

+1

One more thing:
* I think some bits of EditorV2 are still exposed via JavaHL, while we decided not to expose this api at the C layer.

We should probably mark this experimental, remove it, separate it, or...

        Bert
>
> -- Brane
Received on 2015-02-15 11:53:16 CET

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