On Friday, January 21, 2022 at 5:47:54 PM UTC+1 Sébastien Labbé wrote: > I have a question for you. As I understood the past years, I was feeling > the following principles about which tickets are getting merged into sage: > - in beta and in rc0: any ticket with positive review since at least one > or two days and since the last 2-3 weeks. >
Frankly, the quality of positively reviewed tickets has taken a nosedive recently. Its a regular occurrence now that positively reviewed tickets do not build and / or do not pass tests. If you want speedy merges then you can't use me as a CI and throw untested crap at me to see if it works. I'm actively looking at ways to improve this, and the solution will be either social (certain authors/reviewers will automatically be at the end of the queue) or automatic ticket rejections (which have a pretty high chance of false negatives, in particular since incremental builds are currently flakey). > - in early release candidates like rc1, rc2 : any ticket of type "defect" > (so no new features added, only trying to fix bugs important or not > important) > - in late release candidates like rc3, rc4, rc5, etc. : only critical > tickets solving important bugs and allowing to make sure sagemath still > work on every supported platform > I don't think we should have two different phases; Its usually pretty clear when we are close to the end of the release cycle (and I do announce it on sage-devel). Of course if anyone wants to volunteer to release a "Sage-LTS" (long term support) with more bugfixes I certainly wont' be in your way. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sage-release" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/sage-release/a645a0f5-0ca3-4cff-baef-72db9b1dacc7n%40googlegroups.com.
