Sean, > 1.) Branch tomahawk now (even before the core vote is finalized.) > This requires to branch share too, tomahawk head already requires stuff from shared head which is not in the 2.0.0 release. I already expressed my thoughts about this in another post: Every time we release core or tomahawk we have to branch shared too. The result will be e.g shared 2.0.0 for core 1.1.2 shared 2.0.1 for tomahawk 1.1.2 shared 2.0.2 for core 1.1.3 and so on ....
> 2.) Branch core (again) immediately following the release of 1.1.2. > Does this mean, we have to work on the branch again if we have something to change/enhance? Then my -1 to do this, we can start the TCK on the nightly too - and fix the problems there, once the TCK pass and there is sufficient new stuff - we branch. IMHO this might reduce the need to merge down stuff, which is something (the merge down) letting me shudder. > 4.) More TCK testers. Get more of the committers to sign the NDA, and > more importantly, get their machines to be able to run the TCK. The > more TCK testers we have out there the faster we can fix these > problems. > I dont know much about the TCK, but maybe I have a machine where we can setup the TCK to run on a daily - at least weekly basis. Intel Xeon 2.8G HT with 2GB memory. The TCK will run in an VMWare Server there. Should be sufficient, no? Ciao, Mario
