Graham Dumpleton wrote: > > On 09/07/2006, at 7:46 PM, Nicolas Lehuen wrote: > >> OK, I'm currently checking in the fixes you suggested on the trunk. >> Too bad we cannot write a unit test that checks for memory leaks. >> >> Jim, Graham, what shall we do for the 3.2.9 release ? Shall we keep on >> with the current branch or backport the fixes ? > > Were we anticipating doing another backport release in 3.2 branch prior to > a 3.3 release if this memory leak issue hadn't come up? I have been off > doing > other stuff of late and haven't got around to finishing important bits > for 3.3 > before it can be released with the new module importer. Thus, not sure when > it might be ready. There certainly are other things that could be > backported if > we wanted to have another backport release. If we want to do another > backport > release anyway, is this memory leak serious enough to bail on 3.2.9 release > and quickly produce a 3.2.10 with just this extra fix, or release 3.2.9 > and just > add the memory leak fix to a future backport release for 3.2 branch. > > Graham
+1 skip the 3.2.9 release +1 backport to 3.2.x +1 release 3.1.10 asap I'd suggested a couple of months ago that we shoot for a 3.3 release in October / November, and these memory leaks fixes should not wait that long. Jim
