On 21.10.2019 13:16, Julian Foad wrote:
> Johan Corveleyn wrote:
>> Nathan Hartman wrote:
>> Branko Čibej wrote:
>> > By the principle of least surprise, I think it
>> > would be better to merge to trunk, create a
>> > new 1.13.0 release candidate
>>
>> +1
>>
>> > and (maybe?) restart the soak.
>>
>> I support this idea even if the soak must restart or be extended.
>>
>> +1. Since 1.13 contains so very little, I think it's good to be a bit
>> flexible with our planned timing here, to get this on board. I.e.
>> let's merge it in, cut a new rc, and restart the soak.
>
> Dear all, with respect,
>
> I would love to see the Py3 support released ASAP.
>
> But, have we not learned from our past mistakes? We have prepared a
> regular release that is right now looking to be ready to deploy next
> week, on time. If we postpone and destabilize it now [1], this would
> make mockery of "regular" releases. I would love to trust that
> merging the branch will go smoothly with no follow-up required and no
> extra time taken, but history has taught us that it is foolish to
> assume so.
>
> Surely the right approach is to release what we have got (the
> currently soaking 1.13), then release the new one as soon as we can
> get it ready. It sounds like it's not suitable for a patch release, so
> we'll make it a new minor release, calling it 1.14.
If you (or some other RM volunteer) is prepared to roll 1.14 with Python
3 support in, say, a month after 1.13 -- with all that implies for
downstream packagers -- then sure.
> Nothing says we shouldn't release an extra minor release, or that we
> shouldn't make two minor releases close together.
Well, other than that it is also, strictly speaking, a "mockery of
regular releases." :)
-- Brane
Received on 2019-10-21 13:35:49 CEST