On Mon, Jun 3, 2013 at 7:22 AM, C. Michael Pilato <cmpil...@collab.net> wrote: > I'll suggest that the answer is found in how we'd track the issue locally. > "Subversion requires Serf 1.2.1" would be a reasonable issue description. > It would naturally be a 1.8.0 blocking issue. It's resolution (on our end, > at least) would be simple -- some build system twiddling is all. What > remains, then, is the determination of whether those changes (and it is > arguably fair to consider all the changes made between Serf 1.2.0 and 1.2.1, > here, too) are destabilizing or not. If they are considered destabilizing, > we're at least release_date(serf_1.2.1) + 28 days away from 1.8.0-final > again. If they are not, then we should hold off on 1.8.0-rc3 until Serf > 1.2.1 is produced (hopefully Real Soon Now), and then our final release can > come a week after that.
My vote is to not restart the soak. The plan to wait to produce 1.8.0-rc3 until serf 1.2.1 is available and adjust the dependency requirements is exactly what I was planning to do. Given that there's a great deal of overlap in developers with Serf and Subversion, I trust that the Serf folks can choose appropriate changes for 1.2.1 that won't be destabilizing.
