On Sun, 2009-09-13 at 23:09 -0500, Ted Gould wrote:
On Sat, 2009-09-12 at 23:16 -0700, Joshua A. Andler wrote:
Have a short dev cycle for 0.48 which needs to be pretty solid (even if made so over time by point releases... I will commit to continuing a couple of those). Then we go for another long-ish refactoring cycle for 0.49.
One thing that Debian is considering is fixed dates for freezes. So they'd do a freeze on a fixed schedule, and then release when it's ready. I'm curious if this might work for us long term, certainly with a DVCS we'd have more flexibility there.
Interesting approach... I think that this may work for us too after 0.49 since it may be a little unpredictable with the library changes.
For 0.48 the thought is to... move to a DVCS before any code changes are made in trunk. This needs to be discussed and resolved ASAP, svn is not good enough for our needs any longer, period. Then, we drop in this year's SoC work, the spray tool, any big things that are far enough along in people's working copies, polish up everything and fix all new issues discovered from 0.47...
I just want to say here that if we're going to switch to a DVCS, I think we should switch BEFORE merging the SoC projects in. We'll get a better version history there and it'll also make the merges better.
I thought that was what I said... move to a DVCS before any code changes are made in trunk. :)
Any objections or concerns that people feel the need to voice? Anything that other people would like to see during these releases?
I'd like to see if we can't do the same type of library splitouts with libavoid and libcoroco...
Agreed.
Cheers, Josh