On Saturday 24 October 2009, Øyvind Harboe wrote: > Hi D*vid & *ach, > > On Sat, Oct 24, 2009 at 7:40 PM, David Brownell <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Saturday 24 October 2009, Zach Welch wrote: > >> we should start an 0.3.0-rc-dev series almost immediately. > > > > Better: just "0.3.0-rc". An RC series should not be > > getting much beyond bugfixes; it's not dev series. > > I think it would be helpful if we decided on a schedule > and rules of engagement....
I thought we were aiming to release a month ago... > Our releases are not very far removed from snapshots > yet. Give it another 5-10 releases and we'll really need > to tighten the screw on testing, commit rules, etc. My implicit suggestion was that if we're going to have any "RC" at all, we should do it like that. As you noted, testing is going to be problematic since we don't have much of the hardware in hand. As one data point, both Linux and U-Boot have the same issue, and they've settled on a (git-based) devel cycle which features a "merge window" of a few weeks right after each release, terminated by the first "RC". The point of the RC phase is to get *lots* of testing done, merging bugfixes-only. This project is IMO not ready for a release cycle that's half (or more!) RC. But I think we could easily be ready to declare that we'll have a few weeks of RC that are bugfix-only. > I'm very pleased we have successfully migrated to git > before 0.3. Yes; though as Nico pointed out, doing some work in branches would be a good thing. (I'm thinking of checking out "stgit" myself ... ) During a bugfix-only RC phase, it'd be natural for folk to have ongoing development in branches. Then there would be some post-release merges of those branches into the mainline. Having a short 0.3.0-rc1, and maybe 0.3.0-rc2, could be a good way to get our collective feet wet in such processes. :) > > Yes; we're overdue to close this dev cycle, IMO. > > I get the feeling Ųyvind is impatient for 0.4.0-dev ... :) > > One day I'll be able to post messages/email and have > my name come out right: Øyvind. Sorry; when I sent that email, it displayed correctly. Something in the mail system seems to be mangling charsets. That message went out in ISO-8859-1 (I'm forcing this one to UTF-8), which does have the right character: 330 216 D8 Ø LATIN CAPITAL LETTER O WITH STROKE And it's also correct in the mailing list archive: https://lists.berlios.de/pipermail/openocd-development/2009-October/011545.html Something evidently mangled it on the way into your mailbox. - Dave _______________________________________________ Openocd-development mailing list [email protected] https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/openocd-development
