Re: releasing 2.11.0.M2?

[Dirk Frederickx]

Agree. I would be sensible to push out a release; to stabilise the template
upgrade.

dirk

On Mon, Feb 18, 2019 at 5:53 PM Harry Metske  wrote:

> JP,
>
> that would be fine I think.
>
> tx,
> Harry
>
>
> Op zo 17 feb. 2019 om 23:58 schreef Juan Pablo Santos Rodríguez <
> juanpablo.san...@gmail.com>
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > we've been some releases trying to adhere to a release train strategy,
> with
> > stops each quarter. Q4-2018 release had issues, so we
> > ended up releasing it on Jan, 29th, 2019. Given that, I felt that
> probably
> > made sense to skip February stop.
> >
> > However, given that there are a couple of fixes regarding the rename of
> the
> > haddock template to default, a new Dark appereance
> > mode for Haddock, enabled by default, and a few other fixes and
> > improvements, I think releasing 2.11.0.M2 on February would make
> > most sense. I'd only like to extract the util package to its own
> submodule,
> > which should be fairly easy, but other than that, that would
> > be for me if we release on Feb.
> >
> > WDYT?
> >
> >
> > br,
> > juan pablo
> >
>

Re: releasing 2.11.0.M2?

[Harry Metske]

JP,

that would be fine I think.

tx,
Harry


Op zo 17 feb. 2019 om 23:58 schreef Juan Pablo Santos Rodríguez <
juanpablo.san...@gmail.com>

> Hi,
>
> we've been some releases trying to adhere to a release train strategy, with
> stops each quarter. Q4-2018 release had issues, so we
> ended up releasing it on Jan, 29th, 2019. Given that, I felt that probably
> made sense to skip February stop.
>
> However, given that there are a couple of fixes regarding the rename of the
> haddock template to default, a new Dark appereance
> mode for Haddock, enabled by default, and a few other fixes and
> improvements, I think releasing 2.11.0.M2 on February would make
> most sense. I'd only like to extract the util package to its own submodule,
> which should be fairly easy, but other than that, that would
> be for me if we release on Feb.
>
> WDYT?
>
>
> br,
> juan pablo
>