On Wed, Mar 21, 2012 at 01:06:42AM +0100, David Kastrup wrote: > > I have the fear that the desire to get to this state might prompt some > regression fixes that have not necessarily gotten all the diligence that > would have been desirable.
This is a valid fear in general, but I haven't seen it happen yet. Granted, I don't usually review scheme or C++ patches, so perhaps people have been sneaking bad bugfixes in that way? But I somewhat doubt that. > So I am not sure that a "timed release" No. Absolutely not. Yes, it might be good to change the release policy. But I will not accept any discussion along those lines. We discussed matters to death in GOP. It hasn't even been 12 months! What's the point of having a serious policy discussion if it's going to change in a few months? In the summer, I will begin GOP2, and we will begin by reviewing every single policy decision made in GOP. It will be understood that whatever policies we agree upon in GOP 2 will hold for at least the next year. We may end up having a yearly review of such policies. > On the plus side, regressions are being addressed vigorously right now. > Other bugs, however, get to see this vigor as well, leading to more > regressions in their wake. I think we're looking at about 30% Critical regressions due to code in the past year. Solution? More eyes on reviews and/or more regtests. The bulk of Critical regressions happened during the long 2.13 process. Those block a stable release on the basis of last year's policy discussions. To make matters worse, we've begun a big review of the regression tests. I guessimate that we currently have between 5 and 20 broken regtests; the regtest review will probably find those. In the long term, I think we're doing fine. For the first time ever, we're not regularly breaking regtests. I cannot emphasize how important this is -- back when I was handling bugs, I would see 1-2 broken regtests every devel release. Unforuntately we're in for some more pain in the next few months as we discover previously-broken tests, but once that's shaken down, we'll have a trustworthy set of regression tests. - Graham _______________________________________________ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel