I'm all for a new release as well, since 1.3.5 is no longer able to
login without a path or svn update.

The 1.4.0 release should occur when there is a major release for the
daemon. Past releases:

1.2.0 Added support for OSCAR protocol
1.3.0 Added support for (half-assed) protocol plugins
1.4.0 Added ... ?

And don't forget to send out an e-mail to licq-announce, and update
freshmeat. I have a script for that somewhere and will commit it once
I find it.

Jon


On Wed, Sep 10, 2008 at 4:17 AM, Erik Johansson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> 2008/9/9 Anders Olofsson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>> So what do you say? Is it time for a release or does anyone have a good
>> reason for waiting?
>
> +1 for doing a release.
>
>> I could do it if someone tells me how it's done. (I couldn't find any page
>> in trac how to do it so it might be an idea to write one.)
>
> The procedure goes something like this:
> 1. Update/verify http://licq.org/wiki/DeveloperArea/ReleaseNotes/1.3.6
> 2. Get http://svn.licq.org/svn/trunk/scripts/create-licq-tarball.sh
> 3. Run ./create-licq-tarball.sh -n licq-1.3.6-rc1 -g -b -s -r <rev>
> where <rev> is the revision that should become rc1. This will create a
> gz and bz2 tarball and sign them.
> 4. Get http://svn.licq.org/svn/trunk/scripts/tag-licq-release.sh
> 5. Run ./tag-licq-release.sh -v 1.3.6-rc1 -r <rev>. This will create a
> tag in svn.
> 6. Upload the tarballs somewhere and ask Jon to upload them to sf.net.
> 7. Update http://licq.org/wiki/LicqDownload
> 8. Send mail to licq-dev, licq-users and licq-announce
> 9. Write news entry on http://licq.org/
>
> All taken from memory, so I hope I haven't forgotten anything.
>
>> Also, should the new release be version 1.3.6?
>> I know I've done some changes to the plugin API that are not be 100%
>> backwards compatible, would that be reason enough to call it 1.4.0 instead?
>
> Don't know our "rules" for this, but 1.4.0 might be the right thing to do.
>
> /Erik
>
> --
> Erik Johansson
> Home Page: http://ejohansson.se/
> PGP Key: http://ejohansson.se/erik.asc
>

Reply via email to