On Wed, Feb 23, 2011 at 06:43:36PM +0000, Garth N. Wells wrote: > > > On 23/02/11 18:35, Anders Logg wrote: > > On Wed, Feb 23, 2011 at 10:26:24AM -0800, Johan Hake wrote: > >> On Wednesday February 23 2011 09:08:26 Anders Logg wrote: > >>> On Wed, Feb 23, 2011 at 05:03:41PM +0000, Garth N. Wells wrote: > >>>> On 23/02/11 16:59, Anders Logg wrote: > >>>>> On Wed, Feb 23, 2011 at 04:40:09PM +0000, Garth N. Wells wrote: > >>>>>> On 23/02/11 16:35, Anders Logg wrote: > >>>>>>> Is it time to stop pushing so we don't make any last minute breaking > >>>>>>> before the release? > >>>>>> > >>>>>> I can stop - the pushes were somewhat related to a bug fix. > >>>>> > >>>>> Great! If you feel the urge to push, you can always push to > >>>>> ~dolfin-core/dolfin/wells. ;-) > >>>>> > >>>>> Did you just restart the buildbots? I was going to. Anyway, let's wait > >>>>> until they are green and then make the release. > >>>>> > >>>>> I can do the other releases in the meantime. Which packages need > >>>>> release? > >>>>> > >>>>> FFC 0.9.5 > >>>>> UFC 2.0.0 > >>>>> UFL 0.6.0 (or 1.0?) > >>>>> Viper 0.6.0 (or 1.0?) > >>>>> Instant 0.9.9 (or 1.0?) > >>>>> > >>>>> Since we are releasing DOLFIN 1.0 shortly, it might also be good to > >>>>> bump the version numbers of some of the other packages. It would be > >>>>> good to get some comments from the main authors of UFL, Viper, Instant. > >>>>> > >>>>> The main plan could then be to only make new releases of DOLFIN and > >>>>> (maybe) FFC in a month. The other packages have then already be > >>>>> released so we don't need to bother with those (unless we make bug fix > >>>>> releases). > >>>> > >>>> Instant needs a critical fix to allow the calling program to pass the > >>>> SWIG executable, so I wouldn't bump it to 1.0. > >> > >> Agree. > >> > >>>> There are a few other significant issues that may requires changes to > >>>> various packages, so let's not bump any version numbers just yet. > >>> > >>> ok, except for UFC then. > >>> > >>> How about bumping to 0.9.9 (for FFC, FIAT, Viper, UFL)? > >> > >> I suggest bumping just one pointversion. Why should we bump all to 0.9.9? > > > > To indicate that 1.0 is near. > > > > FFC will be 0.9.9. Then 1.0 will be released alongside DOLFIN 1.0. > > > > Let's keep the numbering, and bump it a couple of weeks. I suggest that > we focus on bug fixes in coming period, and make new bug fix releases in > a few weeks as a precursor to 1.0.
Since I haven't heard from the main authors of UFL, Viper etc, I will keep the numbers, but FFC will be 0.9.9. It's no problem making 0.9.10 etc if we should need it. -- Anders _______________________________________________ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~dolfin Post to : dolfin@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~dolfin More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
