Re: [julia-users] Re: Julia v0.3.6

Reporting in from a Starbucks in Seoul. :P Because we have make the files owned by root:admin to get installs in multi-user environments to work properly, these files can't be delet

Re: [julia-users] Re: Julia v0.3.6

Ugh. The OSX buildbot failed to upload to AWS, and now there's a permissions problem in cleaning out the contents of contrib/mac/app: http://buildbot.e.ip.saba.us:8010/builders/nuke_osx10.9/builds/7/steps/Do%20your%20thing%2C%20Duke/logs/stdio It's going to need Elliot to manually log in and fix

Re: [julia-users] Re: Julia v0.3.6

Le lundi 23 mars 2015 à 13:45 -0700, Tony Kelman a écrit : > Anyone have any objections to me tagging 0.3.7, now-ish? A few minutes too late, but it's OK on my side, the RPM builds went fine. Regards > Elliot, if you get this, is there anything special on the buildbot > side to make it post actu

Re: [julia-users] Re: Julia v0.3.6

Okay, I made the tag at cb9bcae93a, but I think it'll need someone with access to the julialang bucket on S3 to handle moving the binaries over. AFAIK the buildbot only ever uploads to the julianightlies bucket. On Monday, March 23, 2015 at 1:45:24 PM UTC-7, Tony Kelman wrote: > Anyone have an

Re: [julia-users] Re: Julia v0.3.6

Anyone have any objections to me tagging 0.3.7, now-ish? Elliot, if you get this, is there anything special on the buildbot side to make it post actual release binaries, or is it just the normal "rc build" on a tagged sha? On Saturday, March 21, 2015 at 9:56:33 PM UTC-7, Tony Kelman wrote: >

Re: [julia-users] Re: Julia v0.3.6

Yeah, that makes sense to me. I'll do a couple more of the simple ones that have recently been flagged, then run through Elliot's checklist. On Saturday, March 21, 2015 at 6:19:35 AM UTC-7, Stefan Karpinski wrote: > We may want to consider doing the minimal number of backports now for > 0.3.7

Re: [julia-users] Re: Julia v0.3.6

We may want to consider doing the minimal number of backports now for 0.3.7 and then doing a bunch more backports right afterwards. Or at least that's what we should do for anything even a little bit risky. On Fri, Mar 20, 2015 at 11:03 PM, Tony Kelman wrote: > There have been fewer backports ov

[julia-users] Re: Julia v0.3.6

There have been fewer backports over the past month. It would help if people can go through and flag any bug fixes or documentation updates that would also apply to the release-0.3 branch. Either mention the @juliabackports user in a commit comment, or add the "Backport pending" label to a corr

[julia-users] Re: Julia v0.3.6

There is 25 commits already on the branch. https://github.com/JuliaLang/julia/compare/v0.3.6...release-0.3 But still 4 issues tagged "backport pending" https://github.com/JuliaLang/julia/issues?q=+label%3A"backport+pending"+

[julia-users] Re: Julia v0.3.6

0.3.7 today ? On Wednesday, February 18, 2015 at 8:41:01 AM UTC+1, Elliot Saba wrote: > > Hello all! The latest bugfix release of the 0.3.x Julia line has been > released. Binaries are available from the usual place > , and as is typical with such things, > ple