On 22.11.2017 11:53, Julian Foad wrote: > At the hackathon today we (me, Stefan Hett, Bert, Johan) have been > talking about how to progress 1.10. > > We think all the features and changes are safe to release and are not > going to get more testing until we produce a "release candidate". (For > example, at that point Stefan will be able to justify taking time at > his work to test the client in production scenarios.) > > * conflict resolution: we understand it is already much better than > 1.9; low risk if parts of it don't work quite right; designed so that > improvements can be made in patch releases.
Other than the new compiler warnings that keep popping up on trunk related to the conflict resolution, I have no objections. > * LZ4 compression: in some senses the risk of bugs here is higher, > but it seems like it is high quality already; is there one remaining > place where we should add LZ4 negotiation (one direction of svnserve > protocol)? Would be nice to have LZ4 negotiation everywhere but not a blocker. > * shelving v1: is isolated -- doesn't affect anything else; is > limited but already useful; will be changed in the next release so > APIs are marked "SVN_EXPERIMENTAL"; changes shelved by this release > could be detected and 'upgraded' by a future release; should the CLI > commands be marked "experimental" in the help, too (Johan thinks yes)? Unless you're absolutely certain that the format and semantics of the CLI commands won't change, I do suggest adding an "experimental" warning to the help text. > After any issues raised in this discussion are resolved, we feel we > should go ahead and produce RC1 as soon as possible. +(1 − ε) -- Brane
