On Tue, Aug 05, 2014 at 01:38:07PM +0400, Alexandre Prokoudine wrote:

On Tue, Aug 5, 2014 at 1:30 PM, Bryce Harrington wrote:

...

How do you feel we're doing? Do you feel Inkscape is solid enough that we could call it good on the bug hunt and proceed with the next stage of the release (perhaps with a select list of must-fix blocker bugs)?

There are 256 bug reports classified as high importance ones at the moment. That's including the ones about various crashes. Too early to call it a day maybe?

Fair points. You can assume a couple dozen of the worst of those we'd carry as release-critical. To me the more important thing at this point in the release process is we have no Critical bugs open, and whatever High priority crashes are mainly rare corner cases, which I think maybe we've achieved now. I'd love to see us get the high priority bug list to zero, but maybe that can be a goal to achieve for the 1.0 release (although it sounds ambitious even for that.)

I'll count this as one vote in favor of keeping on with the bug hunt as planned.

Bryce

On Tue, Aug 05, 2014 at 09:07:24AM -0400, Martin Owens wrote:

On Tue, 2014-08-05 at 02:30 -0700, Bryce Harrington wrote:

...

How do you feel we're doing? Do you feel Inkscape is solid enough that we could call it good on the bug hunt and proceed with the next stage of the release (perhaps with a select list of must-fix blocker bugs)?

Inkscape is good enough atm for a pre 1.0 release. If we get blockers, those can be focused on.

So we're looking at an about screen contest and lots of tarballs and package testing before we move onto freeze? I'm hoping all the work on 48.5 will help with the packages :-D

I'm feeling fairly good about the tarball situation. I need to do a pre2 tarball; each time I've sat down to doing it I've instead gotten distracted into working on packaging scripting stuff, fixing warnings, etc. I'll try to get pre2 out this week though.

There are still some warnings from make distcheck, but they're mostly in 3rd party libs like libcroco and 2geom. It'd be wonderful to get those addressed so we have a clean build, but I'm not going to lose any sleep over them.

If we have a schedule (date wise) for hard freeze, I can make sure the website work is ready to host the installers and tarballs now we have the extra space for the website. Let me know how hard to focus on it.

The problem is we'll presumably have a list of release-blocker bugs, but since we're all volunteers working on them, we won't be able to predict how long it'll take to get those fixed. Indeed, sometimes they've held us up a long time... but we've been able to do a regression bug hunt, and now are through one and a half "regular" bug hunts, so maybe our list will be much more tractable now.

So far from the people I've heard from publically and privately, we're split 50/50 whether to keep going with bug fixing vs. moving ahead to next step of the release, but I haven't heard from that many people. I think we should give it another couple weeks; we're doing great right now at getting bugs closed, and Liam in particular has a strong momentum.

Meanwhile, I'll get pre2 done and maybe we can get the about screen contest under way, and then by the end of the month we can take another look at where we are.

Bryce

On Tue, 2014-08-12 at 00:15 -0400, Liam White wrote:

I'm not sure that 1500 points is enough right now — there are just still too many regressions. OS X packaging is a mess. Many things need fixing and we probably need more time.

I was hearing great things from OSX people about suv's packaging. I was under the impression it was getting better. Not true?

I haven't seen a lot of regressions, although we are seeing lots of bugs. But that's ok, northing's perfect.

Would it be terrible if we fixed more of the bugs leading up to a 1.0 release instead?

Martin,