On 30/01/18 10:45, Matt Caswell wrote:
> No feedback so I started the vote:
>
> topic: We should update the release strategy as shown in
> https://github.com/openssl/web/pull/41, commit id 52d9ea8fb
> Proposed by Matt Caswell
> Public: yes
> opened: 2018-01-30
> closed: -mm-dd
> ONE WE
On 29/01/18 11:04, Matt Caswell wrote:
>
>
> On 25/01/18 19:08, Matt Caswell wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 25/01/18 11:59, Salz, Rich wrote:
>>> As long as we have the freedom to release earlier, this looks okay to me.
>>
>> I added this sentence to make that freedom crystal clear:
>>
>> "This may be amen
On 25/01/18 19:08, Matt Caswell wrote:
>
>
> On 25/01/18 11:59, Salz, Rich wrote:
>> As long as we have the freedom to release earlier, this looks okay to me.
>
> I added this sentence to make that freedom crystal clear:
>
> "This may be amended at any time as the need arises"
>
> I have tak
On 25/01/18 11:59, Salz, Rich wrote:
> As long as we have the freedom to release earlier, this looks okay to me.
I added this sentence to make that freedom crystal clear:
"This may be amended at any time as the need arises"
I have taken this proposal and made it into a PR for updating the
rele
As long as we have the freedom to release earlier, this looks okay to me.
On 1/25/18, 6:00 AM, "Matt Caswell" wrote:
On 25/01/18 07:39, Richard Levitte wrote:
> In message on Wed, 24
Jan 2018 20:48:54 +, Matt Caswell said:
>
> matt> On 24/01/18 19:12, Salz, Rich
On 25/01/18 07:39, Richard Levitte wrote:
> In message on Wed, 24 Jan
> 2018 20:48:54 +, Matt Caswell said:
>
> matt> On 24/01/18 19:12, Salz, Rich wrote:
> matt> > A monthly release cadence for beta seems too long. I would prefer
> two weeks. And we keep doing that until TLS 1.3 is pu
In message on Wed, 24 Jan
2018 20:48:54 +, Matt Caswell said:
matt> On 24/01/18 19:12, Salz, Rich wrote:
matt> > A monthly release cadence for beta seems too long. I would prefer two
weeks. And we keep doing that until TLS 1.3 is published.
matt>
matt> That might be ok. As a technical i
So a few months into it, we look at changing the schedule if we need to stretch
thing out.
On 1/24/18, 3:49 PM, "Matt Caswell" wrote:
On 24/01/18 19:12, Salz, Rich wrote:
> A monthly release cadence for beta seems too long. I would prefer two
weeks. And we keep doing that u
On 24/01/18 19:12, Salz, Rich wrote:
> A monthly release cadence for beta seems too long. I would prefer two weeks.
> And we keep doing that until TLS 1.3 is published.
That might be ok. As a technical issue though we can only have a maximum
of 14 alpha/beta releases (due to the format of OPE
A monthly release cadence for beta seems too long. I would prefer two weeks.
And we keep doing that until TLS 1.3 is published.
On 1/24/18, 12:32 PM, "Matt Caswell" wrote:
Reviving the 1.1.1 release timetable discussion now that we have a
clearer idea of the scope of outstanding issu
On 24/01/18 17:32, Matt Caswell wrote:
> 14th March 2018, beta release 1 (pre2)
> OpenSSL_1_1_1-stable created (feature freeze)
> master becomes basis for 1.1.2 or 1.2.0 (TBD)
> 11th March 2018, beta release 2 (pre3)
That should of course say 11th April.
Matt
___
Reviving the 1.1.1 release timetable discussion now that we have a
clearer idea of the scope of outstanding issues/PRs.
Here is my updated straw man proposal for the 1.1.1 release timetable.
The only changes to this from my original proposal is to shift the dates
(because in my original proposal w
12 matches
Mail list logo
