The 0.5.0 milestone on github does in fact reflect our best understanding of what's in the release. Perhaps there is a presentation or UI problem here, but fundamentally I don't see why a list of issues wouldn't work for this. One problem seems to be that people too often add fairly minor items to the 0.5.0 milestone, so randomly-chosen bugs get mixed in. Anything that could be addressed in a point release should be in the 0.5.x milestone.
I think it could help if everybody actively critiques the milestone issues, instead of looking at it and just concluding the list is junk. For example, comment "this looks like a small bug, please move to 0.5.x", or "is anybody working on this?" etc. On Wed, Mar 9, 2016 at 5:02 PM, Jeffrey Sarnoff <[email protected]> wrote: > With the ability to add methods to an abstract type, so we do not lose that > important capability; makes sense to me. > > On Wednesday, March 9, 2016 at 2:14:27 PM UTC-5, Stefan Karpinski wrote: >> >> The sticking point has been the decision – which seemed to have already >> been made as of last summer – about whether slices should be views or not. >> There has been fierce debate about that and no apparent consensus. Part of >> the problem is that we do not yet have all of the compiler support required >> to fully evaluate the potential performance of array views: we still need to >> heap allocate any object which refers to heap allocated objects, which means >> that we cannot stack allocate array views and the compiler cannot do much to >> optimize them. >> >> At this point, I'm inclined to wrap up the rest of the array changes, >> including the one that Scott brings up and start the RC phase for 0.5. That >> would leave the array view change as a future potential change. >> >> On Wed, Mar 9, 2016 at 1:36 PM, David Anthoff <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> At some point in the summer there was communication from the core team >>> that v0.5 would be a short release cycle that was all about the >>> arraypocalypse theme. My sense is that this original plan is off the table, >>> and that (as John said) there is no new time plan to replace the original >>> one, or at least none has been communicated from the core at this point. >>> Take this info with a grain of salt, I’m largely reading tea-leaves here :) >>> >>> >>> >>> From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On >>> Behalf Of John Myles White >>> Sent: Wednesday, March 9, 2016 10:17 AM >>> To: julia-users <[email protected]> >>> Subject: [julia-users] Re: What to read to understand finishing v0.5? >>> >>> >>> >>> I think it's fair to say that the reason your questions aren't already >>> answered by GitHub is because there's no one who's made an executive >>> decision about the answers to those questions. >>> >>> >>> >>> -- John >>> >>> On Wednesday, March 9, 2016 at 4:44:28 AM UTC-8, Andreas Lobinger wrote: >>> >>> Hello colleagues, >>> >>> i need a bigger picture of the status of v0.5, dates, timelines, missing >>> features, missing testing, expected closing. Just go to github and select >>> the v0.5 milestone gives me a diverse picture. >>> >>> Wishing ahappy day, >>> Andreas >> >> >
