W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-qa-dev@w3.org > July 2003

Re: [check] Misc. Headsup...

From: Ville Skyttä <ville.skytta@iki.fi>
Date: 20 Jul 2003 18:57:44 +0300
To: Terje Bless <link@pobox.com>
Cc: QA Dev <public-qa-dev@w3.org>, Frederic Schutz <schutz@mathgen.ch>
Message-Id: <1058716664.833.27.camel@bobcat.mine.nu>

On Sun, 2003-07-20 at 18:32, Terje Bless wrote:

> How about this...
> 
> We leave 0.6.1 as the last 0.6.x release for now, and then branch off to
> validator-0_7-branch from the validator-0_6_0-branch (instead of branching
> from HEAD) and make a 0.7.0 release from there.
> 
> validator-0_7-branch then becomes the stable/critical-bugfix-only branch (with
> checkin dicipline in effect[0]) and immediately transition to adding new stuff
> on HEAD. If HEAD is too borken to easily add a given random minor
> feature/change, then that is just a great incentive to _un_break HEAD.
> 
> If nobody hollers I'll proceede after that plan (probably beginning tonight).
> 
> 
> Oh, and "checkin dicipline"; how about summat like:
> 
>   1. Any checkin needs to reference a Bugzilla Bug #.
>   2. Any checkin needs to be applied also to HEAD.
> 
> (excepting trivial/typo-style stuff onbviously)

No objections here.

> >Some status on the RPMs: I've updated the specfile in 0_6_0-branch so
> >that apart from the version numbers, it should be ready to roll.
> >
> >Specifically, the Version:, Release: (reset to 1w3c if the next version
> >is > 0.6.2), Source0: and Source1: tags should be updated to match the
> >version number.  And a %changelog entry would be nice :)
> 
> I assume this is changelog for the _RPM_ and not in general?

Yes.

> >OpenSP 1.5 continues to be a slight PITA on Red Hat.  I won't go into
> >details; just a note that their Rawhide (WIP area) contains
> >openjade-1.3.2 which includes OpenSP 1.5.  OpenSP 1.5 is not available
> >for RH 9 (current release) and earlier versions from RH.
> 
> I've asked them to split the packages but twaugh seems disinclined to do so
> for whatever reason (it took the -R security issue to get them to upgrade it
> at all).

Those are probably the very same issues that I've found, it'll be
necessary to rebuild a biggish bunch of other, dependent packages too if
one wants to cleanly repackage SP and Jade separately :/  And even if
that can be done, it may get hairy to support smooth upgrades from
previous versions.

> Well, we're not jumping through hoops for them, but if we can teak scheduling
> slightly in order to take advantage of new release attention I think that
> would be advantageous. e.g. to announce Red Hat 9.1 packages immediately after
> they start sending press releases ought to get us a little bit of free
> attention.

Yep.  Because of the SP/Jade issues above, I think it would make sense
to make the RPM 9.1 (or whatever it'll be called) only when it's out,
instead of providing a package that isn't really out of the box workable
anywhere.

-- 
\/
Received on Sunday, 20 July 2003 11:57:53 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 19 August 2010 18:12:43 GMT