On Thu, 22 Nov 2012 04:00:04 +1030 Simon <si...@simotek.net> wrote: > On Wed, Nov 21, 2012 at 5:48 PM, Gustavo Sverzut Barbieri > <barbi...@profusion.mobi> wrote: > > > On Wednesday, November 21, 2012, Thomas Sachau wrote: > > > >> Gustavo Sverzut Barbieri schrieb: > >>> On Wednesday, November 21, 2012, Carsten Haitzler wrote: > >>> > >>>> On Wed, 21 Nov 2012 13:54:14 +0000 Michael Blumenkrantz > >>>> <michael.blumenkra...@gmail.com <javascript:;> <javascript:;>> > >>>> said: > >>>> > >>>>> On Wed, Nov 21, 2012 at 1:47 PM, Carsten Haitzler < > >> ras...@rasterman.com <javascript:;><javascript:;> > >>>>> wrote: > >>>>> > >>>>>> On Wed, 21 Nov 2012 13:18:41 +0000 Michael Blumenkrantz > >>>>>> <michael.blumenkra...@gmail.com <javascript:;> > >>>>>> <javascript:;>> said: > >>>>>> > >>>>>>> ah, how quickly bets are made against me the instant I leave > >>>>>>> the > >>>> country. > >>>>>>> my league of admirers is always so reliable! > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> distcheck is always run before a release. always. > >>>>>> then how did it pass when the edje_cc in the 1.7 branch > >>>>>> literally did crash in > >>>>>> this scenario - it wasnt random. it literally was ALWAYS a > >>>>>> strcmp > >>>> against > >>>>>> NULL... > >>>>>> > >>>>>>> I said previously that I run the stable branch at work; I'm > >>>>>>> not at > >>>> work. > >>>>>> aaaah so you didn't distcheck this one against stable branch? > >>>>>> > >>>>> I'm on vacation, bedridden most of the time with the German > >>>>> Plague and > >> a > >>>>> fever so high that the top of it can't be seen from the peak of > >>>>> Mt. Everest. Despite this, I managed to drag myself to my > >>>>> computer to try > >> and > >>>>> do a release. > >>>>> > >>>>> I would appreciate greatly if people could stop being less > >>>>> negative and critical, and instead focus more on being both > >>>>> productive and > >>>> constructive. > >>>> > >>>> fair enough - i just never expected this should even get through > >>>> if you > >> are > >>>> building/testing against 1.7 - since you are not right now that > >>>> dos > >> create > >>>> some > >>>> issues and changes expectations that you are testing against > >>>> that. > >>> > >>> How about you, Raster? Are you able to test with 1.7.x? You've > >>> mentioned this edje_cc bug and the Evas leaks. Anything else that > >>> is know but > >> pending > >>> to be debugged in EFL (leaks, crashes) or we can do a 1.7.2? > >> If doing a full release cycle for all released libs is too much > >> work, what about just a minor release for edje (like version > >> 1.7.1.1), so that users can again use release tarballs to build > >> alpha4 of e17? > > Seems reasonable. But I guess there are other stuff in other libs > > to be out. They just wanted to get it closer to e17 being out. > > > > I'd say we need the libs should be out before e17, then we can make > > sure it works. > > > > Then the only situation to avoid releasing EFL is if there is > > something pending fix (leaks, crashes) that must get done before > > such release. > > > It shouldn't happen when blocker issues were fixed. > > There is definitely no point in releasing a new tarball that can't > > be used with 1.7.x branch. > > It's blocker, new e17 tarball won't build. > > > > In this case a version 1.7.2 should be released. > > > > Before releasing e17, most probably more fixes will be done, and a > > version 1.7.3 should be released. > > But if another blocker issue is found, another release would be > > required before. > > > > Sure, it's impossible to Mike handle all this stuff alone. Luis > > commented he and Mike were talking about creating a release team or > > something like that to handle this situation. > > Most probably they will send something to the list about it soon. > > > > Regards. > > +1 > > There should also be a efl 1.7.x beta out a week before the final e17 > release so we get atleast 2 e17 beta's built against it, Neither > should change to much unless something goes horribly wrong failure to > do this could quite likely mean emergency bugfix releases within a > week after the actual release. I prefer the idea of a edje 1.7.1.1 to > patching it manually (Atleast we all still have the same codebase) > however Bruno's suggestion is definitely my preferred one. > > In my opinion If everyone is so under the pump and busy they can't do > a 1.7.x release this week the e17 release should be pushed back 1 > week (or till the new year if its more practical) due to major issues > found during alpha.
But then we will miss the end of the world and it will be too late. B-) -- A big old stinking pile of genius that no one wants coz there are too many silver coated monkeys in the world.
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Monitor your physical, virtual and cloud infrastructure from a single web console. Get in-depth insight into apps, servers, databases, vmware, SAP, cloud infrastructure, etc. Download 30-day Free Trial. Pricing starts from $795 for 25 servers or applications! http://p.sf.net/sfu/zoho_dev2dev_nov
_______________________________________________ enlightenment-devel mailing list enlightenment-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/enlightenment-devel
