I think I agree, and I think this was Mac dev/packager consensus last time this was discussed. Wikipedia says 10.11 is the oldest supported right now, but I can't find any primary source. Just for the record, I think we should lock this in at the start of a stable series. This means whatever oldest version we support for 5.0, we should continue to support until 6.0.
Adam Wolf On Nov 26, 2017 7:31 PM, "Simon Wells" <[email protected]> wrote: > I Think it mainly comes down to, if there is a bug reported on 10.9 do we > want to be a) trying to sort out why its an issue when we only have newer > systems or b) scrambling around trying to find an older install to be able > to test the issue and solve it > > Therefore I think its best to at most only support the oldest version that > is still supported by apple at the time 5.0 is released (or at least when > the RC is released). > > It does not stop someone building for an older version of OSX, but if they > have issues it is up to them (with the older operating system) to solve them > > Simon > > > > On 27/11/2017, at 1:41 PM, Adam Wolf <[email protected]> > wrote: > > I'll definitely be keeping the 4.0 server around for at least 6+ months, > but the plan is to generate the 5.0 stable releases from a 10.x VM. We > should have a test image after next weekend. We had previously discussed > using the oldest OS version still getting security updates, which appears > to be 10.11. I could do anything from 10.9 on. > > Do people think supporting 10.11 and newer is sufficient? > > Adam Wolf > > On Nov 26, 2017 6:23 PM, "Chris Pavlina" <[email protected]> wrote: > >> With an upcoming 5.0 I'm not sure how necessary it is to re-release >> 4.0.7 - I just want to make sure the same mistake doesn't get made for >> 5.0... >> >> On Sun, Nov 26, 2017 at 11:03:48PM +0000, Wayne Stambaugh wrote: >> > 4.0.7-2 seems reasonable if the previous macos version was 4.0.7-1. >> > >> > On 11/26/2017 05:25 PM, Adam Wolf wrote: >> > > 1) I'll take a look at the script, but I suspect Nick is correct. >> > > >> > > 2) What version number should I release this 4.0.7 as? 4.0.7-2? >> > > >> > > Adam Wolf >> > > >> > > On Sun, Nov 26, 2017 at 3:35 PM, Nick Østergaard <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> > >> It is because of what happened in: >> > >> [Kicad-developers] Yet another 4.0.7 release bug. >> > >> https://lists.launchpad.net/kicad-developers/msg30192.html >> > >> >> > >> I suspect that the script for the OSX build did not consider that >> tags could >> > >> move. Which I think could happen like this: >> > >> >> > >> A tag will get pulled down when you pull normally. But if it changes >> > >> upstream you need to fetch with the --tags option >> > >> to sync it. >> > >> >> > >> 2017-11-26 20:12 GMT+01:00 Chris Pavlina <[email protected]>: >> > >>> >> > >>> Okay people, wtf happened here. >> > >>> >> > >>> Helping someone on IRC figure out a PDF export bug on 4.0.7, when I >> > >>> realized this: >> > >>> >> > >>> https://misc.c4757p.com/pastes/0AOyojEiEE0V.txt >> > >>> >> > >>> ^ "Tag stable release" is commit 631f6d5, on July 14. The ACTUAL >> 4.0.7 >> > >>> tag is on 9f35e38, four commits later on August 1. >> > >>> >> > >>> Guess which one got released? >> > >>> >> > >>> Yup, we released the wrong commit for 4.0.7. The older one, missing >> > >>> several bug fixes. How did we manage to release something that >> wasn't >> > >>> actually tagged as 4.0.7? Doesn't the release build process involve >> > >>> something like "git checkout 4.0.7"? Help me understand what went >> wrong >> > >>> here... >> > >>> >> > >>> I'm still trying to figure out how a commit titled "tag stable >> release >> > >>> 4.0.7" and the actual 4.0.7 tag do not point at the same place, let >> > >>> alone how the release build process does not actually directly >> check out >> > >>> the 4.0.7 tag. >> > >>> >> > >>> -- >> > >>> Chris >> > >>> >> > >>> _______________________________________________ >> > >>> Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers >> > >>> Post to : [email protected] >> > >>> Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers >> > >>> More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> _______________________________________________ >> > >> Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers >> > >> Post to : [email protected] >> > >> Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers >> > >> More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp >> > >> >> > > >> > > _______________________________________________ >> > > Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers >> > > Post to : [email protected] >> > > Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers >> > > More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp >> > > >> > >> > _______________________________________________ >> > Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers >> > Post to : [email protected] >> > Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers >> > More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers >> Post to : [email protected] >> Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers >> More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp >> > _______________________________________________ > Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers > Post to : [email protected] > Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers > More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp > > >
_______________________________________________ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers Post to : [email protected] Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
