Re: Subversion 1.1.2 released.

On Wed 2004-12-22 at 15:14:34 -0800, you wrote
> On Mon, 20 Dec 2004 20:04:48 -0800, Ben Reser wrote:
> > Subversion 1.1.2 is ready. Grab it from:
>
> Thanks for the hard work. As a user/admin, I'm trying to figure out
> how quickly I should upgrade after a release announcement.
>
> I'm not familiar with the release process for Subversion. Has 1.1.2
> been tested by various users outside the team?

Yes and no.

No, they was no release candidate that was tested by "outsiders". Yes,
the fixes got tested by a lot of users, because the fixes are part of
the trunk (the main development line) and only ported back to the
1.1.x branch.

Additionally, each patch had to be approved (that is: reviewed and
tested) by three of the devs, in order to be applied to the 1.1.x
branch.

Note that this is only for patch releases (that is 1.1.x). Minor
releases (that is 1.x.0) have a freeze period of 4 weeks (details in
the HACKING doc) with release candidate and all.

> Also, is there an automated regression test suite that the
> development team uses to lock down bugfixes?

Yes.

> If so, how complete is it? If not, how is testing done?

It's good, but could be improved. IIRC, someone once did an explicit
test coverage analysis for Subversion, but I don't have it handy.
You'd have to search in the archives yourself.

> I'm currently getting along with 1.1.1 great, but I see plenty of
> enticing fixes in the 1.1.2 notes.

Experience shows that any problems with such a release are reported
within some days due to the sheer number of users. So I'd call it safe
for use on production systems after a week if their are no reports
until then. But in the end, you have to do the risk management yourself.

Bye,

        Benjamin.

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Fri Dec 24 09:15:42 2004