Stefan Fuhrmann wrote:
As of r1819491, the CHANGES for 1.10 should be complete.
The file might use some sorting / grouping and certainly a review.
I have just committed a few initial tweaks, and mentioned some thoughts
on IRC.
While we would like to make more improvements to its
Stefan Fuhrmann wrote:
As of r1819491, the CHANGES for 1.10 should be complete.
The file might use some sorting / grouping and certainly a review.
Awesome!
Thanks, Stefan!
Happy Christmas, Subversion!
- Julian
On 28.12.2017 19:17, Stefan Fuhrmann wrote:
On 25.12.2017 14:20, Stefan Sperling wrote:
On Mon, Dec 25, 2017 at 12:21:46PM +0100, Stefan Fuhrmann wrote:
So, this is the result. It also covers the changes
skipped by release.py (first block of 5 entries).
I will try to reformulate & group the
On 25.12.2017 14:20, Stefan Sperling wrote:
On Mon, Dec 25, 2017 at 12:21:46PM +0100, Stefan Fuhrmann wrote:
So, this is the result. It also covers the changes
skipped by release.py (first block of 5 entries).
I will try to reformulate & group the list and then
commit them to CHANGES by
On Mon, Dec 25, 2017 at 12:21:46PM +0100, Stefan Fuhrmann wrote:
> So, this is the result. It also covers the changes
> skipped by release.py (first block of 5 entries).
>
> I will try to reformulate & group the list and then
> commit them to CHANGES by Wednesday.
Thanks! This helps a lot with
On 24.12.2017 09:39, Stefan Fuhrmann wrote:
On 23.12.2017 14:30, Johan Corveleyn wrote:
I'm afk for a couple of days so can't try it myself now, but
release.py write-changelog --include-unlabeled-summaries
branches/1.10.x tags/1.10.0-alpha3
might provide a good starting point.
I'm
On 23.12.2017 14:30, Johan Corveleyn wrote:
I'm afk for a couple of days so can't try it myself now, but
release.py write-changelog --include-unlabeled-summaries
branches/1.10.x tags/1.10.0-alpha3
might provide a good starting point.
I'm giving it a try right now. It starts with 162
Daniel Shahaf wrote:
Julian Foad wrote on Fri, 22 Dec 2017 15:08 +:
* Does the CHANGES file need to be updated before we can roll RC1?
In my opinion this is a "documentation change" and we can release an RC1
with incomplete CHANGES for the first 3 weeks of soak period, [...]
I'm not sure
I'm afk for a couple of days so can't try it myself now, but
release.py write-changelog --include-unlabeled-summaries
branches/1.10.x tags/1.10.0-alpha3
might provide a good starting point.
--
Johan
Julian Foad wrote on Fri, 22 Dec 2017 15:08 +:
> * Does the CHANGES file need to be updated before we can roll RC1?
>
> In my opinion this is a "documentation change" and we can release an RC1
> with incomplete CHANGES for the first 3 weeks of soak period, and
> release RC2 with completed
Julian Foad wrote on Fri, 22 Dec 2017 15:08 +:
> * What do we know about the current up-to-date-ness of CHANGES?
>
> It looks like a lot of changes are listed already. Do we have to review
> every change since 1.9 or is there some subset of that work that we can
> accept as having been done
* Does the CHANGES file need to be updated before we can roll RC1?
In my opinion this is a "documentation change" and we can release an RC1
with incomplete CHANGES for the first 3 weeks of soak period, and
release RC2 with completed CHANGES (whether any other changes are needed
or not) for
12 matches
Mail list logo
