On Mon, Oct 24, 2016 at 01:28:49PM -0500, Michael Catanzaro wrote: > On Mon, 2016-10-24 at 20:22 +0200, Sébastien Wilmet wrote: > > And, the master branch is now ready for GtkSourceView 3.24. The > > question > > is: when to release it? Do we do a period of freeze? There are a few > > changes for translations. > > I think you can do as you please, so long as you give sufficient time > (say, two weeks) for translators to do their thing. You could release > it alongside GNOME 3.22, for example. > > It might be less confusing to call it GtkSourceView 3.22.2, and just > accept that it will have rather bigger changes than are typical for a > stable release.
Mmh, not sure I like that approach. It would require to change the "Since: 3.24" to "Since: 3.22" and removing the versioning macros for 3.24. At least two apps are already depending on GtkSourceView >= 3.23.1 (released yesterday). (on the master branch of those two apps, there is no releases so it is also fixable). For downstreams, I think it's important that they can trust us to not sneak in unexpected things in new stable micro versions. New stable micro versions should contain only bug fixes, sometimes performance fixes and translation updates. So it is normally always safe, for downstreams, to update to the latest micro versions of GNOME without looking in details what changed for each module. If from time to time we sneak in unexpected things, downstreams will no longer trust us. For example in Debian stable, they already prefer keeping a GNOME module at 3.14.0 instead of updating to 3.14.2, even though 3.14.2 has important bug fixes (but they have a strict policy to update packages during their freeze). As an upstream developer, I don't like when distros keep the .0 micro version. So, in summary, I would prefer calling GtkSourceView 3.24 "GtkSourceView 3.24". -- Sébastien _______________________________________________ [email protected] https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/release-team Release-team lurker? Do NOT participate in discussions.
