Re: [E-devel] Schedule discussion for 1.19

On Thu, 9 Feb 2017 10:16:12 +0100 Stefan Schmidt said: > Hello. > > On 09/02/17 00:47, Carsten Haitzler (The Rasterman) wrote: > > On Wed, 8 Feb 2017 15:12:56 +0100 Stefan Schmidt > > said: > > > >> Hello. > >> > >> On 07/02/17 10:37, Carsten

Re: [E-devel] Schedule discussion for 1.19

Hello. On 09/02/17 04:50, Simon Lees wrote: > > > On 02/09/2017 12:42 AM, Stefan Schmidt wrote: >> Hello. >> >> On 07/02/17 10:37, Carsten Haitzler (The Rasterman) wrote: >>> On Tue, 7 Feb 2017 18:25:58 +1030 Simon Lees said: >>> On 02/06/2017 10:06 PM, Gustavo

Re: [E-devel] Schedule discussion for 1.19

Hello. On 09/02/17 00:47, Carsten Haitzler (The Rasterman) wrote: > On Wed, 8 Feb 2017 15:12:56 +0100 Stefan Schmidt > said: > >> Hello. >> >> On 07/02/17 10:37, Carsten Haitzler (The Rasterman) wrote: >>> On Tue, 7 Feb 2017 18:25:58 +1030 Simon Lees

Re: [E-devel] Schedule discussion for 1.19

On 02/09/2017 12:42 AM, Stefan Schmidt wrote: > Hello. > > On 07/02/17 10:37, Carsten Haitzler (The Rasterman) wrote: >> On Tue, 7 Feb 2017 18:25:58 +1030 Simon Lees said: >> >>> >>> >>> On 02/06/2017 10:06 PM, Gustavo Sverzut Barbieri wrote: Time-based releases keep

Re: [E-devel] Schedule discussion for 1.19

On 02/08/2017 11:59 PM, Felipe Magno de Almeida wrote: > I don't get the reluctance on releasing now. IMO, if we stop releasing > in a timely fashion, EFL will become full of bugs again. EFL was > becoming quite stable with the releases that Stefan has been managing. > If we start questioning

Re: [E-devel] Schedule discussion for 1.19

On Wed, 8 Feb 2017 15:12:56 +0100 Stefan Schmidt said: > Hello. > > On 07/02/17 10:37, Carsten Haitzler (The Rasterman) wrote: > > On Tue, 7 Feb 2017 18:25:58 +1030 Simon Lees said: > > > >> > >> > >> On 02/06/2017 10:06 PM, Gustavo Sverzut Barbieri

Re: [E-devel] Schedule discussion for 1.19

Hello. On 07/02/17 10:37, Carsten Haitzler (The Rasterman) wrote: > On Tue, 7 Feb 2017 18:25:58 +1030 Simon Lees said: > >> >> >> On 02/06/2017 10:06 PM, Gustavo Sverzut Barbieri wrote: >>> >>> Time-based releases keep the expectations if they are followed. Once >>> we miss the

Re: [E-devel] Schedule discussion for 1.19

Hello. On 07/02/17 08:28, Carsten Haitzler (The Rasterman) wrote: > On Tue, 7 Feb 2017 11:56:38 +0900 Jean-Philippe André > said: > >> My only point with gl filters, eo intf and cmake is that we have those >> works in progress that need to be put on hold if we're intent on

Re: [E-devel] Schedule discussion for 1.19

Hello. I let this thread sit for a while to get some more insights. On 07/02/17 03:56, Jean-Philippe André wrote: > Hey, > > Sorry, it looks like I worded my questions badly :) > > On 6 February 2017 at 20:36, Gustavo Sverzut Barbieri > wrote: > >> On Mon, Feb 6, 2017 at

Re: [E-devel] Schedule discussion for 1.19

I'm agreeing with Felipe here. What say ye? On Wed, Feb 8, 2017 at 1:29 PM, Felipe Magno de Almeida < felipe.m.alme...@gmail.com> wrote: > I don't get the reluctance on releasing now. IMO, if we stop releasing > in a timely fashion, EFL will become full of bugs again. EFL was > becoming quite

Re: [E-devel] Schedule discussion for 1.19

I don't get the reluctance on releasing now. IMO, if we stop releasing in a timely fashion, EFL will become full of bugs again. EFL was becoming quite stable with the releases that Stefan has been managing. If we start questioning the releases, we will always find reasons why not to release now.

Re: [E-devel] Schedule discussion for 1.19

>> Like I'd love to see efl_net being tested in the field as it's what >> ecore_con uses internally to provide legacy, as well as people being >> able to use the Eo API directly. >> > > People can't use the EO API directly. Or are we declaring EO stable now? If > so we need to properly separate

Re: [E-devel] Schedule discussion for 1.19

On Tue, 7 Feb 2017 18:25:58 +1030 Simon Lees said: > > > On 02/06/2017 10:06 PM, Gustavo Sverzut Barbieri wrote: > > > > Time-based releases keep the expectations if they are followed. Once > > we miss the frame, we start to have this feature-based releases ("oh, > > waited so

Re: [E-devel] Schedule discussion for 1.19

On 02/06/2017 10:06 PM, Gustavo Sverzut Barbieri wrote: > > Time-based releases keep the expectations if they are followed. Once > we miss the frame, we start to have this feature-based releases ("oh, > waited so long, can wait a bit more") and when people work > independently, they always have

Re: [E-devel] Schedule discussion for 1.19

Hey, Sorry, it looks like I worded my questions badly :) On 6 February 2017 at 20:36, Gustavo Sverzut Barbieri wrote: > On Mon, Feb 6, 2017 at 8:31 AM, Stefan Schmidt > wrote: > > Hello. > > > > On 06/02/17 10:33, Jean-Philippe André wrote: > >> Hi,

Re: [E-devel] Schedule discussion for 1.19

On Mon, Feb 6, 2017 at 8:31 AM, Stefan Schmidt wrote: > Hello. > > On 06/02/17 10:33, Jean-Philippe André wrote: >> Hi, >> >> On 1 February 2017 at 23:46, Stefan Schmidt wrote: >> >>> Hello. >>> >>> On 12/12/16 11:34, Stefan Schmidt wrote:

Re: [E-devel] Schedule discussion for 1.19

Hello. On 06/02/17 10:33, Jean-Philippe André wrote: > Hi, > > On 1 February 2017 at 23:46, Stefan Schmidt wrote: > >> Hello. >> >> On 12/12/16 11:34, Stefan Schmidt wrote: >>> Hello. >>> >>> Next try. People started to ask me about 1.19 again more recently so >>> here is

Re: [E-devel] Schedule discussion for 1.19

Hi, On 1 February 2017 at 23:46, Stefan Schmidt wrote: > Hello. > > On 12/12/16 11:34, Stefan Schmidt wrote: > > Hello. > > > > Next try. People started to ask me about 1.19 again more recently so > > here is my new schedule proposal for 1.19. > > > > 2016-08-11 Merge

Re: [E-devel] Schedule discussion for 1.19

Hello. On 12/12/16 11:34, Stefan Schmidt wrote: > Hello. > > Next try. People started to ask me about 1.19 again more recently so > here is my new schedule proposal for 1.19. > > 2016-08-11 Merge window for 1.19 opens > 2017-02-07 Merge window is over. > * Only bug fixes from this point > *

Re: [E-devel] Schedule discussion for 1.19

Great. I'm looking forward to the next Edi release which is once again dependent upon the next major EFL release :) Andy On Mon, 12 Dec 2016 at 11:44, Al Poole wrote: > Month of stabilization sounds good! > > On Mon, Dec 12, 2016 at 10:34 AM, Stefan Schmidt

Re: [E-devel] Schedule discussion for 1.19

Month of stabilization sounds good! On Mon, Dec 12, 2016 at 10:34 AM, Stefan Schmidt wrote: > Hello. > > Next try. People started to ask me about 1.19 again more recently so > here is my new schedule proposal for 1.19. > > 2016-08-11 Merge window for 1.19 opens >

Re: [E-devel] Schedule discussion for 1.19

Hello. Next try. People started to ask me about 1.19 again more recently so here is my new schedule proposal for 1.19. 2016-08-11 Merge window for 1.19 opens 2017-02-07 Merge window is over. * Only bug fixes from this point * Alpha release tarball * One month stabilization phase starts

Re: [E-devel] Schedule discussion for 1.19

Hello. On 14/11/16 02:55, Gyuyoung Kim wrote: > Hello Stefan, > > I wanna start to prepare EWebKit 1.19 version soon. Please let me know when > EFL 1.19 candidate is prepared. > > I will make EWebKit 1.19 based on the candidates. Great to hear! We have not finalized the 1.19 schedule yet. The

Re: [E-devel] Schedule discussion for 1.19

Hello Stefan, I wanna start to prepare EWebKit 1.19 version soon. Please let me know when EFL 1.19 candidate is prepared. I will make EWebKit 1.19 based on the candidates. BR, Gyuyoung. On Mon, Sep 5, 2016 at 11:20 PM, Stefan Schmidt wrote: > Hello. > > 1.18 is out

Re: [E-devel] Schedule discussion for 1.19

On 10/26/2016 10:32 PM, Stefan Schmidt wrote: > Hello. > > On 26/10/16 12:28, Simon Lees wrote: >> >> >> On 10/26/2016 07:43 PM, Stefan Schmidt wrote: >>> Hello. >>> >>> On 24/10/16 19:42, Cedric BAIL wrote: On Mon, Oct 24, 2016 at 1:48 AM, Stefan Schmidt

Re: [E-devel] Schedule discussion for 1.19

Hello. On 26/10/16 12:28, Simon Lees wrote: > > > On 10/26/2016 07:43 PM, Stefan Schmidt wrote: >> Hello. >> >> On 24/10/16 19:42, Cedric BAIL wrote: >>> On Mon, Oct 24, 2016 at 1:48 AM, Stefan Schmidt >>> wrote: On 12/09/16 19:01, Cedric BAIL wrote: > On Mon,

Re: [E-devel] Schedule discussion for 1.19

On 10/26/2016 07:43 PM, Stefan Schmidt wrote: > Hello. > > On 24/10/16 19:42, Cedric BAIL wrote: >> On Mon, Oct 24, 2016 at 1:48 AM, Stefan Schmidt >> wrote: >>> On 12/09/16 19:01, Cedric BAIL wrote: On Mon, Sep 12, 2016 at 7:58 AM, Stefan Schmidt

Re: [E-devel] Schedule discussion for 1.19

On 10/26/2016 07:57 PM, Stefan Schmidt wrote: > Hello. > > On 24/10/16 23:01, Simon Lees wrote: >> >> >> On 10/25/2016 04:12 AM, Cedric BAIL wrote: >>> On Mon, Oct 24, 2016 at 1:48 AM, Stefan Schmidt >>> wrote: On 12/09/16 19:01, Cedric BAIL wrote: > On Mon,

Re: [E-devel] Schedule discussion for 1.19

Hello. On 10/09/16 00:37, Andrew Williams wrote: > Hi. > > The schedule sounds fine - you're right there is plenty to do. > But. I feel after the Eo API is still not stable after 1.18 that maybe the > release milestones should be a feature / API / completeness commitment > rather than time? Do

Re: [E-devel] Schedule discussion for 1.19

Hello. On 24/10/16 23:01, Simon Lees wrote: > > > On 10/25/2016 04:12 AM, Cedric BAIL wrote: >> On Mon, Oct 24, 2016 at 1:48 AM, Stefan Schmidt >> wrote: >>> On 12/09/16 19:01, Cedric BAIL wrote: On Mon, Sep 12, 2016 at 7:58 AM, Stefan Schmidt

Re: [E-devel] Schedule discussion for 1.19

Hello. On 24/10/16 19:42, Cedric BAIL wrote: > On Mon, Oct 24, 2016 at 1:48 AM, Stefan Schmidt > wrote: >> On 12/09/16 19:01, Cedric BAIL wrote: >>> On Mon, Sep 12, 2016 at 7:58 AM, Stefan Schmidt >>> wrote: On 10/09/16 01:29, Cedric BAIL

Re: [E-devel] Schedule discussion for 1.19

On Tue, 25 Oct 2016 10:08:58 +0200 Stefan Schmidt said: > Hello. > > On 25/10/16 03:56, Carsten Haitzler (The Rasterman) wrote: > > On Mon, 24 Oct 2016 10:49:27 +0200 Stefan Schmidt > > said: > > > >> Hello. > >> > >> On 13/09/16 00:31, Simon

Re: [E-devel] Schedule discussion for 1.19

Hello. On 25/10/16 03:56, Carsten Haitzler (The Rasterman) wrote: > On Mon, 24 Oct 2016 10:49:27 +0200 Stefan Schmidt > said: > >> Hello. >> >> On 13/09/16 00:31, Simon Lees wrote: >>> >>> >>> On 09/13/2016 12:28 AM, Stefan Schmidt wrote: Hello. On

Re: [E-devel] Schedule discussion for 1.19

On Tue, 25 Oct 2016 07:31:33 +1030 Simon Lees said: > > > On 10/25/2016 04:12 AM, Cedric BAIL wrote: > > On Mon, Oct 24, 2016 at 1:48 AM, Stefan Schmidt > > wrote: > >> On 12/09/16 19:01, Cedric BAIL wrote: > >>> On Mon, Sep 12, 2016 at 7:58 AM, Stefan

Re: [E-devel] Schedule discussion for 1.19

On Mon, 24 Oct 2016 10:49:27 +0200 Stefan Schmidt said: > Hello. > > On 13/09/16 00:31, Simon Lees wrote: > > > > > > On 09/13/2016 12:28 AM, Stefan Schmidt wrote: > >> Hello. > >> > >> On 10/09/16 01:29, Cedric BAIL wrote: > >>> Hello, > >>> > >>> I fully agree with

Re: [E-devel] Schedule discussion for 1.19

On 10/25/2016 04:12 AM, Cedric BAIL wrote: > On Mon, Oct 24, 2016 at 1:48 AM, Stefan Schmidt > wrote: >> On 12/09/16 19:01, Cedric BAIL wrote: >>> On Mon, Sep 12, 2016 at 7:58 AM, Stefan Schmidt >>> wrote: On 10/09/16 01:29, Cedric BAIL

Re: [E-devel] Schedule discussion for 1.19

On Mon, Oct 24, 2016 at 1:48 AM, Stefan Schmidt wrote: > On 12/09/16 19:01, Cedric BAIL wrote: >> On Mon, Sep 12, 2016 at 7:58 AM, Stefan Schmidt >> wrote: >>> On 10/09/16 01:29, Cedric BAIL wrote: I fully agree with Andrew. I have yet to

Re: [E-devel] Schedule discussion for 1.19

Hello. On 13/09/16 00:31, Simon Lees wrote: > > > On 09/13/2016 12:28 AM, Stefan Schmidt wrote: >> Hello. >> >> On 10/09/16 01:29, Cedric BAIL wrote: >>> Hello, >>> >>> I fully agree with Andrew. I have yet to review what still need to be >>> done regarding Efl new interface task, but I hope that

Re: [E-devel] Schedule discussion for 1.19

Hello. On 12/09/16 19:01, Cedric BAIL wrote: > On Mon, Sep 12, 2016 at 7:58 AM, Stefan Schmidt > wrote: >> Hello. >> >> On 10/09/16 01:29, Cedric BAIL wrote: >>> Hello, >>> >>> I fully agree with Andrew. I have yet to review what still need to be >>> done regarding Efl

Re: [E-devel] Schedule discussion for 1.19

On 14/09/16 17:53, Cedric BAIL wrote: > On Wed, Sep 14, 2016 at 3:03 AM, Tom Hacohen wrote: >> On 13/09/16 23:07, Stefan Schmidt wrote: >>> On 12/09/16 19:01, Cedric BAIL wrote: On Mon, Sep 12, 2016 at 7:58 AM, Stefan Schmidt wrote: >

Re: [E-devel] Schedule discussion for 1.19

On Wed, Sep 14, 2016 at 3:03 AM, Tom Hacohen wrote: > On 13/09/16 23:07, Stefan Schmidt wrote: >> On 12/09/16 19:01, Cedric BAIL wrote: >>> On Mon, Sep 12, 2016 at 7:58 AM, Stefan Schmidt >>> wrote: On 10/09/16 01:29, Cedric BAIL wrote: > I

Re: [E-devel] Schedule discussion for 1.19

On 09/14/2016 07:37 AM, Stefan Schmidt wrote: > Hello. > > On 12/09/16 19:01, Cedric BAIL wrote: >> On Mon, Sep 12, 2016 at 7:58 AM, Stefan Schmidt >> wrote: >>> Hello. >>> >>> On 10/09/16 01:29, Cedric BAIL wrote: Hello, I fully agree with Andrew. I

Re: [E-devel] Schedule discussion for 1.19

On 13/09/16 23:07, Stefan Schmidt wrote: > Hello. > > On 12/09/16 19:01, Cedric BAIL wrote: >> On Mon, Sep 12, 2016 at 7:58 AM, Stefan Schmidt >> wrote: >>> Hello. >>> >>> On 10/09/16 01:29, Cedric BAIL wrote: Hello, I fully agree with Andrew. I have yet to

Re: [E-devel] Schedule discussion for 1.19

Hello. On 12/09/16 19:01, Cedric BAIL wrote: > On Mon, Sep 12, 2016 at 7:58 AM, Stefan Schmidt > wrote: >> Hello. >> >> On 10/09/16 01:29, Cedric BAIL wrote: >>> Hello, >>> >>> I fully agree with Andrew. I have yet to review what still need to be >>> done regarding Efl

Re: [E-devel] Schedule discussion for 1.19

On 09/13/2016 12:28 AM, Stefan Schmidt wrote: > Hello. > > On 10/09/16 01:29, Cedric BAIL wrote: >> Hello, >> >> I fully agree with Andrew. I have yet to review what still need to be >> done regarding Efl new interface task, but I hope that 1.19 will be >> our final call. We do now have time to

Re: [E-devel] Schedule discussion for 1.19

On Mon, Sep 12, 2016 at 7:58 AM, Stefan Schmidt wrote: > Hello. > > On 10/09/16 01:29, Cedric BAIL wrote: >> Hello, >> >> I fully agree with Andrew. I have yet to review what still need to be >> done regarding Efl new interface task, but I hope that 1.19 will be >> our

Re: [E-devel] Schedule discussion for 1.19

Hello. On 10/09/16 01:29, Cedric BAIL wrote: > Hello, > > I fully agree with Andrew. I have yet to review what still need to be > done regarding Efl new interface task, but I hope that 1.19 will be > our final call. We do now have time to cleanup example and check that > things look fine. Please

Re: [E-devel] Schedule discussion for 1.19

On 09/10/2016 08:07 AM, Andrew Williams wrote: > Hi. > > The schedule sounds fine - you're right there is plenty to do. > But. I feel after the Eo API is still not stable after 1.18 that maybe the > release milestones should be a feature / API / completeness commitment > rather than time?

Re: [E-devel] Schedule discussion for 1.19

Hello, I fully agree with Andrew. I have yet to review what still need to be done regarding Efl new interface task, but I hope that 1.19 will be our final call. We do now have time to cleanup example and check that things look fine. Thanks, Cedric On Fri, Sep 9, 2016 at 3:37 PM, Andrew

Re: [E-devel] Schedule discussion for 1.19

Hi. The schedule sounds fine - you're right there is plenty to do. But. I feel after the Eo API is still not stable after 1.18 that maybe the release milestones should be a feature / API / completeness commitment rather than time? Honestly right now I want to avoid another release that may not be

Re: [E-devel] Schedule discussion for 1.19

Hello. On 05/09/16 16:20, Stefan Schmidt wrote: > Hello. > > 1.18 is out for almost a month now. Time to start thinking about the > schedule for 1.19. > > Personally I would like that we get back to our original 3 months > schedule as soon as possible. Reality is that we had to postpone some >