- 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>
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 UTC