Troy A. Griffitts wrote:
Anyway, all this to say, I now know of no outstanding issues with SVN
head and would REALLY appreciate testing and feedback from frontends to
let us know if we're ready for a release.
Sounds good!
One helpful way to encourage such testing would be to tag the current
svn head as (say) 1.6.rc1, and then publish a tarball of that code,
making it available by FTP from your site. Is this something you would
consider doing?
This approach allows packagers to package and then test that release
candidate, and report back on results, more easily than working directly
from SVN, because others may generate tarballs slightly differently from
how the SWORD devel team does, etc.
It would be conventional to do alpha and then beta releases like this
(svn tag, then create and publish a tarball of the tagged snapshot), and
then do an rc1, but if the general consensus is that the SWORD svn tree
is "ready for a release", then going straight to rc1 might be appropriate.
If there is any concern about making such alpha/beta/rc releases "too
public", perhaps you could just put the source tarball(s) somewhere on
the CrossWire FTP site and only announce that location here on
sword-devel ? CrossWire could even decide not to publish any binary
test releases at all, just source code release(s), until the decision is
made to go for a final "gold" release of the library??
Jonathan
_______________________________________________
sword-devel mailing list: [email protected]
http://www.crosswire.org/mailman/listinfo/sword-devel
Instructions to unsubscribe/change your settings at above page
