Le lundi 23 mars 2015 à 13:45 -0700, Tony Kelman a écrit : > Anyone have any objections to me tagging 0.3.7, now-ish? A few minutes too late, but it's OK on my side, the RPM builds went fine.
Regards > Elliot, if you get this, is there anything special on the buildbot > side to make it post actual release binaries, or is it just the normal > "rc build" on a tagged sha? > > > On Saturday, March 21, 2015 at 9:56:33 PM UTC-7, Tony Kelman wrote: > Yeah, that makes sense to me. I'll do a couple more of the > simple ones that have recently been flagged, then run through > Elliot's checklist. > > > On Saturday, March 21, 2015 at 6:19:35 AM UTC-7, Stefan > Karpinski wrote: > We may want to consider doing the minimal number of > backports now for 0.3.7 and then doing a bunch more > backports right afterwards. Or at least that's what we > should do for anything even a little bit risky. > > On Fri, Mar 20, 2015 at 11:03 PM, Tony Kelman > <[email protected]> wrote: > There have been fewer backports over the past > month. It would help if people can go through > and flag any bug fixes or documentation > updates that would also apply to the > release-0.3 branch. Either mention the > @juliabackports user in a commit comment, or > add the "Backport pending" label to a > corresponding issue or pull request (if you're > a contributor who has the permissions to > modify labels). Anything borderline, ask > whether it could/should be backported in a > comment. > > > Going by the so-far-monthly schedule we should > think about 0.3.7 soon, the one major thing > that would fix over 0.3.6 would be the Windows > "need to restart Julia before adding ZMQ from > WinRPM" problem. > > > > On Friday, March 20, 2015 at 12:36:32 PM > UTC-7, Ivar Nesje wrote: > There is 25 commits already on the > branch. > > > https://github.com/JuliaLang/julia/compare/v0.3.6...release-0.3 > > But still 4 issues tagged "backport > pending" > > > https://github.com/JuliaLang/julia/issues?q=+label%3A"backport+pending"+ > >
