Re: List ownership

Thanks Andre. I'll likely tighten the settings further, to Reject, after a few days (at which point we'll need to figure out new procedures for requesting freeze breaks), but let's see how it goes. Michael ___ release-team@gnome.org

List ownership

Hi, Whoever this is... please make me the list owner here: We need to enable moderation, the spam is too much. Michael ___ release-team@gnome.org

Re: Time to move to Discord...?

On Thu, Oct 17, 2019 at 7:42 PM, Jordan Petridis wrote: What will happen to the security ML also, it counts for a good portion of the spam here. Do we instruct people to open confidential issues against the releng repo and/or the corresponding module? Hm, I feel like most of what we do is

Re: New Mutter dependency: Graphene

Thanks for the heads-up! ___ release-team@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/release-team Release-team lurker? Do NOT participate in discussions.

Re: VTE & Terminal requirement bumps

Thanks for the heads-up! ___ release-team@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/release-team Release-team lurker? Do NOT participate in discussions.

Re: Announcement of new dependencies for GNOME modules

On Thu, Sep 12, 2019 at 8:59 AM, Emmanuele Bassi wrote: ``` If you change anything related to the build system: - dependencies - build options then send a message to release-team@gnome.org. ``` Nice, simple, LGTM. ___ release-team@gnome.org

Re: Announcement of new dependencies for GNOME modules

On Wed, Sep 11, 2019 at 11:04 AM, Jordan Petridis via release-team wrote: Should we extend this to tweaking/adding/removing meson options? Good point, yes. ___ release-team@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/release-team

Re: Announcement of new dependencies for GNOME modules

On Wed, Sep 11, 2019 at 7:48 AM, Emmanuele Bassi wrote: - the minimum required version of the dependency Can it be optional if gnome-build-meta has the new enough version already? Or do we not trust maintainers enough for that? :P ___

Re: 3.35/3.36 schedule vs moving Tarballs Due to Fridays

OK, I've pushed changes to the releng repo. Here is the wiki page result: https://wiki.gnome.org/MichaelCatanzaro/ScheduleTest I haven't tested the ical creation. Andre, can you take over from here? ___ release-team@gnome.org

Re: freeze break request: clean up X property in at-spi2-core

On Sun, Sep 8, 2019 at 10:57 AM, Mike Gorse wrote: I don't think that it would be the end of the world if this fix has to wait for 3.34.1, but, on the other hand, it fixes a regression introduced in the 3.34 cycle, so I'd lean towards committing it if people approve. Well the purpose of

Re: GNOME 3.33.92 (GNOME 3.34rc2) RELEASED

On Fri, Sep 6, 2019 at 6:56 PM, Javier Jardón wrote: the final release is scheduled next Wednesday! Oops, it will really be Thursday, September 12. The release was originally scheduled for Wednesday because I'm bad at picking good dates. You might still have stale calendar events scheduled

Re: 3.35/3.36 schedule vs moving Tarballs Due to Fridays

I've been experimenting here: https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/releng/commit/b8cc54884dfd28d5f18637e2f801e3055a8641ec And here: https://wiki.gnome.org/MichaelCatanzaro/ScheduleTest Changes: * One fewer week between newstable .0 and the .1, to help Fedora and potentially Ubuntu take the .1

Doc team notifications of freeze breaks

Hi, Historically, our rules for freezes have required notifying gnome-doc-list@ of any freeze breaks. This rule has not always been followed (I'm a flagrant violator myself). Since nowadays documentation operates on a longer cadence (generally years rather than months), I think it really

Re: Second Epiphany freeze break request

On Thu, Sep 5, 2019 at 6:14 PM, Javier Jardón wrote: One approval for you Any seconds? ___ release-team@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/release-team Release-team lurker? Do NOT participate in discussions.

Third Epiphany freeze break request

Hi, Adrian found an integer underflow that breaks the adblocker in incognito mode: https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/epiphany/merge_requests/423/diffs Would be great to have another freeze exception to fix this. Michael ___ release-team@gnome.org

Re: 3.35/3.36 schedule vs moving Tarballs Due to Fridays

On Fri, Sep 6, 2019 at 7:02 AM, mcatanz...@gnome.org wrote: * 12 months of stable releases; this means the schedule will be 18 months total rather than 6 BTW this was the one remaining topic I wanted to discuss before proposing a new schedule. We agreed at GUADEC on 12 months of stable

Re: 3.35/3.36 schedule vs moving Tarballs Due to Fridays

In the end, we agreed to use Saturday for the tarball deadlines. There are other changes to the schedule: * No more overall release date, except for the stable .0 release. We'll have only tarball deadlines on the schedule and the overall release will come when it arrives. * New translator

Second Epiphany freeze break request

Hi, Due to some changes in WebKit, some code that could previously be reached only once is now run multiple times. So Epiphany needs to be more careful about not doing one-time things there, like connecting to signals. This commit:

Re: Freeze break request: Tracker and Tracker-miners

Looks fine, approval 1/2 ___ release-team@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/release-team Release-team lurker? Do NOT participate in discussions.

Re: Code freeze break request for GLib

On Thu, Sep 5, 2019 at 5:08 AM, Philip Withnall wrote: I would like to make the GLib 2.62.0 release tomorrow morning (Friday 6th) due to being away from the afternoon onwards. Can I get a couple of approvals before then? Approval 1/2 ___

Re: GNOME Shell freeze break request

On Thu, Sep 5, 2019 at 7:45 AM, Emmanuele Bassi wrote: RT approval 1/2. Approval 2/2 ___ release-team@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/release-team Release-team lurker? Do NOT participate in discussions.

Re: Freeze exceptions for mutter and gnome-shell

On Wed, Sep 4, 2019 at 2:21 PM, Matthias Clasen via release-team wrote: Thanks for the detailed explanations. That helps in judging the requests. The middle two MRs are unpleasantly large, but I'll give you approval 1/2, since they all look carefully done and reviewed by the shell team.

Re: Freeze break request to fix gnome-initial-setup

Approval +1 / 2 for both changes ___ release-team@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/release-team Release-team lurker? Do NOT participate in discussions.

Re: freeze break request: use after free in at-spi2-core

On Tue, Sep 3, 2019 at 4:04 PM, Mike Gorse wrote: I need to fix a use after free in at-spi2-core. Patch attached. Sorry everyone. Carelessness on my part. It happens, here's approval 1 / 2 ___ release-team@gnome.org

Re: String & UI Freeze break request for GNOME Shell

On Tue, Sep 3, 2019 at 1:17 PM, Matthias Clasen via release-team wrote: Tentatively ok with it, but I left a comment. And since this has some string additions, please also ask gnome-i...@gnome.org for their ok. It's not great to see this so late, but here's your second +1

Code freeze break request

Hi, I'd like to request code freeze break to merge this fix: https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/epiphany/merge_requests/419/diffs It might fix (a) a bug causing various Epiphany features to break, and (b) some UI process memory corruption. Should be very low-risk since it's only two lines.

Re: Hard code freeze break approval plea for Evolution

On Tue, Sep 3, 2019 at 7:20 AM, Milan Crha via release-team wrote: It already landed, that's why I initiated the mail/plea here: https://trac.webkit.org/changeset/249421/webkit I know, but I don't like it. I think WebKit should revert whatever needs to be reverted to get back to its old

Re: GNOME Notes 3.34?!?

On Tue, Sep 3, 2019 at 5:48 AM, Isaque Galdino via release-team wrote: Thanks Andre. I've read it again, but I don't see a instruction for when we miss a previous release, e.g. 3.33.90. So I'm not sure how to proceed. Thanks. I would call your release 3.33.92, and then do 3.34.0 next week.

Re: Hard code freeze break approval plea for Evolution

On Tue, Sep 3, 2019 at 4:24 AM, Milan Crha via release-team wrote: g_setenv ("WEBKIT_USE_SINGLE_WEB_PROCESS", "1", FALSE); -1 from me, even as an emergency workaround (and I do understand this is an emergency, with release due next week) I don't think a new environment variable is

Re: UI freeze break request for g-c-c

Copying the original mail below, because this got stuck in the moderation queue: On Tue, Aug 27, 2019 at 4:17 PM, Gunnar Hjalmarsson wrote: Hello release team, I'd like to request a freeze break to allow the merge of:

Re: Feature freeze break request for Sushi

In that case, approval 1 / 2. ___ release-team@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/release-team Release-team lurker? Do NOT participate in discussions.

Re: UI freeze break request for g-c-c

Approval 1 / 2 ___ release-team@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/release-team Release-team lurker? Do NOT participate in discussions.

Re: Feature freeze break request for Sushi

On Tue, Aug 27, 2019 at 12:45 PM, Cosimo Cecchi via release-team wrote: The two merge requests ([2] and [3]) have been reviewed by Carlos here at GUADEC and should be ready to go in case the feature freeze break is granted. [2] looks OK for a freeze break, but [3] seems extensive. Are you

Re: Four-in-a-Row board drawing fix

On Wed, Aug 21, 2019 at 5:38 PM, Arnaud Bonatti via release-team wrote: I’ve an easy but imperfect fix, that I’ve pushed on arnaudb/fix-board-drawing [1]. It’s just calculating the board size depending on the tile size, and not the opposite. Problem is, that makes the board a bit jumping during

Re: Release Team presentation at the GNOME Foundation AGM

We'll definitely have somebody present. (If no other volunteers, I'll do it.) It's probably too late to expect slides though. Michael ___ release-team@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/release-team Release-team lurker? Do NOT

Re: Bump release date for 3.34 from 9/11

I've modified the schedule here: https://wiki.gnome.org/ThreePointThirtythree And here: https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/releng/commit/a682bb24a0d9c46141c003b88ccb5dc8508e4027 Michael ___ release-team@gnome.org

Re: Bump release date for 3.34 from 9/11

Oops, how about switching to September 12 instead? I don't see any compelling need to stick to the usual Wednesday date. Andreas, Matthias, sound OK? Michael ___ release-team@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/release-team

Re: Some nigthly flatpaks are failing to build

On Fri, Aug 2, 2019 at 5:51 PM, Michael Gratton wrote: Is there any way to get notification for build failures here? I frequently don't end up seeing the build failures. Email sent to people listed in the project's DOAP maybe? Unfortunately there's currently no way to be notified of build

Re: GNOME 3.33.4 unstable tarballs due (responsible: jjardon)

Hi, This release will be delayed, probably until next week. We're still working out problems with dependencies. Michael ___ release-team@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/release-team Release-team lurker? Do NOT participate in

Re: GNOME 3.33.1 RELEASED

On Fri, Apr 26, 2019 at 2:43 AM, Samuel Thibault wrote: I guess I am missing something in the process of releasing a version? Or is accerciser perhaps just not part of a desktop package set? Only GNOME core elements are included in the release. accerciser is in world, not core. Michael

Re: FYI: vte 0.56.2 + No more ftp tarballs

I think for the time being, the practical consequence is that we'll no longer update vte in our flatpak runtimes, until we make changes to our release infrastructure to support this. (Which we've been considering doing for a long time anyway; we seem to have consensus that in the long term

Welcome Jordan!

Hi, A little while back we approved asking Jordan (alatiera) to join the release team. At the time, he declined, but now he's willing to join under the time-honored rule "just keep doing the same stuff you're already doing." Since we all approved his joining quite recently and I assume this

Re: Unauthorized translation changes in dconf-editor

Please keep gnome-i...@gnome.org CCed On Mon, Mar 18, 2019 at 5:02 AM, Arnaud Bonatti wrote: Hi Jeremy and Michael, hi release-team, 2019-03-17 17:01 UTC+01:00, mcatanz...@gnome.org : I see: https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/dconf-editor/commits/maintainer-only-3-32/po which seems

Re: Unauthorized translation changes in dconf-editor

On Sun, Mar 17, 2019 at 10:11 AM, Jeremy Bicha wrote: I am reviving this old thread because it looks like Arnaud never stopped making his changes. He has created separate "maintainer-only" branches. He makes his release tags and tarball releases from those branches. This has continued with the

Re: UI/String freeze break request for gnome-boxes

On Fri, Mar 15, 2019 at 9:53 AM, Alexandre Franke wrote: Thanks for the details you provided, they were helpful in making the decision. Yeah, this seems sufficiently-exceptional to justify the proposed changes. r-t approval one of two. ___

Re: 3.33/3.34 schedule draft: questions

On Sun, Mar 10, 2019 at 1:17 PM, mcatanz...@gnome.org wrote: Hm, Looks like the .90 is currently scheduled for two weeks before your feature freeze, so pushing it back one week, like I suggest, should be OK. The .1 looks tight, though. In our current schedule, we have .1 tarballs due

Re: Freeze break request for atk MR!14

On Sat, Mar 9, 2019 at 8:32 AM, apinheiro wrote: So although technically this is an API change, I think that it is really small, and the effect would be small, and I would like to include this on release .32.0 Hm, did GTK get fixed too? It looks like the answer is no? (I don't see

Re: 3.33/3.34 schedule draft: questions

On Sat, Mar 9, 2019 at 4:03 AM, Jeremy Bicha wrote: My opinion is that the dates that are critical for Ubuntu are the .90 release (compared with Ubuntu's Feature Freeze) and the .1 release (compared with Ubuntu's release day). Hm, Looks like the .90 is currently scheduled for two weeks

Re: Freeze break request for GNOME Shell

+1 / 2 ___ release-team@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/release-team Release-team lurker? Do NOT participate in discussions.

Re: 3.33/3.34 schedule draft: questions

On Fri, Mar 8, 2019 at 3:34 AM, Andre Klapper wrote: I've put up a draft schedule at https://wiki.gnome.org/ThreePointThirtythree and in https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/releng/commit/6ff90169cc36f0793beaf27fde629cc7118eee6f Problem: GUADEC is very late (end of August) and 3.34 release should

Re: g-i freeze break

On Fri, Mar 8, 2019 at 3:15 AM, Andre Klapper wrote: Yes please. r-t approval 1 of 2. andre 2 / 2, go for it. ___ release-team@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/release-team Release-team lurker? Do NOT participate in discussions.

Re: Freeze break request for mutter!486

+1 / 2 This new fix is more code, which triggers my "risky last-minute commit" instincts, but I trust you're proposing it because you think it's safer than the originally-accepted solution, in light of the "other reported issues." Michael ___

Freeze break request for Epiphany

Hi, I'd like to request a freeze break to fix a crash in Epiphany when opening the preferences dialog with certain languages configured: https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/epiphany/merge_requests/219/diffs Thanks, Michael ___ release-team@gnome.org

Re: Hardcode break request: mutter

On Tue, Mar 5, 2019 at 11:44 AM, Andre Klapper wrote: Yes please. r-t approval 1 of 2. Approval 2 / 2 ___ release-team@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/release-team Release-team lurker? Do NOT participate in discussions.

Re: [evolution-data-server] UI/string freeze break approval request

1 / 2 release team ___ release-team@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/release-team Release-team lurker? Do NOT participate in discussions.

Re: Update your libhandy submodules (and packages)

Yeah, a new libhandy release ASAP would be appreciated. Affected applications: epiphany gnome-bluetooth gnome-contacts gnome-control-center gnome-games I think libhandy has reached the point that it's time to start thinking about making it a system dependency so we don't have to enter panic

Re: pygobject freeze break request

+1 / 2 release team ___ release-team@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/release-team Release-team lurker? Do NOT participate in discussions.

Re: String Freeze Break - totem

"The source seems encrypted and can’t be read. Are you trying to play an encrypted DVD without libdvdcss?" It's challenging to come up with an error message that provides the right level of technical detail for users to be able to fix the problem, without confusing nontechnical users. Not

Re: GNOME Boxes | Feature Freeze

It's getting kinda late in the cycle for changes like this, but it doesn't look like too much code. I'll give +1 of 2 release team. Michael ___ release-team@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/release-team Release-team lurker? Do NOT

Re: Seahorse - String freeze break

Oops! +1 / 2 release team ___ release-team@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/release-team Release-team lurker? Do NOT participate in discussions.

Re: Feature freeze request - reversion of adaptive shell in GNOME Control Center

On Wed, Feb 20, 2019 at 9:57 AM, Robert Ancell via release-team wrote: I'd like to request a change [1] in GNOME Control Center to disable the adaptive panel feature. This is due to it introducing some bugs [2] and not all panels being updated in time for 3.32. The feature will return in

Re: GNOME Music freeze break request

On Sat, Feb 16, 2019 at 9:02 PM, mcatanz...@gnome.org wrote: I like what Music is doing, +2. To be clear, that's 2/2 release team. ___ release-team@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/release-team Release-team lurker? Do NOT

Re: GNOME Music freeze break request

On Fri, Feb 8, 2019 at 10:56 AM, Emmanuele Bassi via release-team wrote: Thank you for the clarification; in one of the issues you linked I saw the error screen with a GDBus blurb and I got worried. :-) On Fri, Feb 8, 2019 at 5:15 AM, Emmanuele Bassi via release-team wrote: Are we really

Re: Epiphany freeze break request: incognito mode tab style

On Mon, Feb 11, 2019 at 3:44 AM, Javier Jardón wrote: Thanks for the screenshots 1/2 for release team Anyone else? Feels like cheating to give the second approval myself. Michael ___ release-team@gnome.org

Re: System Monitor Freeze Break exception

+1 of 2 ___ release-team@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/release-team Release-team lurker? Do NOT participate in discussions.

Re: g-c-c display panel UI freeze break request to closer match the 3.30 interface

+1 of 2 ___ release-team@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/release-team Release-team lurker? Do NOT participate in discussions.

Re: gnome-software string freeze break request

On Fri, Sep 14, 2018 at 8:08 AM, Matthias Clasen via release-team wrote: I asked for this, so +1 from me. +1 from me as well. You still need two translator approvals. ___ release-team@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/release-team

Re: Release team involvement

On Tue, Sep 4, 2018 at 12:21 PM, Olav Vitters wrote: Hi all, Over the last few years I haven't contributed much to the release team. It's time to come to the conclusion that it won't change and it's better to leave the team. I hope clearly acknowledging this ensures there's room for others

Re: Freeze break request for gnome-shell

I'm nervous about this one for three reasons: * It's gjs, so any subtle flaw in this changeset could cause entire functions to be skipped over * We're two days before the tarball deadline, so there's really no time left to notice if any such flaws were to sneak in * It's also drag-and-drop

Re: Code freeze break request: backwards compatibility fix

Looks like this is important. Approval 1 of 2 ___ release-team@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/release-team Release-team lurker? Do NOT participate in discussions.

Re: UI Freeze Break Request for GNOME Initial Setup

I'll give a hesitant +1 here. (You also need a second approval.) * Please consider Will's concern about the network appearing to disappear after it's selected. That doesn't seem like a great user experience. * Use of NetworkManager in gnome-initial-setup is a known cause of crashers in

Re: Tracker (+miners) 2.1.x is the stable series for GNOME 3.30

On Tue, Jul 24, 2018 at 5:05 AM, Carlos Garnacho wrote: Hmm, I see 2 ways to make that happen: - As usual, bump by 1 during unstable, bump by 1 for .0. The first bump may make sense (depends on whether there's actual API additions, tending to be scarce in Tracker), but the second bump would be

Re: Tracker (+miners) 2.1.x is the stable series for GNOME 3.30

On Mon, Jul 23, 2018 at 6:45 PM, Carlos Garnacho wrote: I might send more reminders in the future whenever it might get confusing, but changes like this within the cycle apply anytime in the future too. How semver and gnome cycles will be made to fit neatly is TBD, but rest assured there will

Re: GNOME 3.29.3 unstable tarballs due (responsible: mcatanzaro)

On Thu, Jun 14, 2018 at 8:02 PM, Federico Mena Quintero wrote: This: http://ftp.gnome.org/pub/GNOME/teams/releng/3.29.2/versions has librsvg 2.40.20, which is the unmaintained series. How can I change it to 2.43.0 for the development release? I'd really like to get some testing there.

Re: Allow gnome-build-meta notifications from gitlab-issues@ ?

On Sun, Jun 3, 2018 at 11:14 AM, Andre Klapper wrote: Shall we allow them by default or will this be too much noise? The goal is to use release-team@ to assess whether it will be too much noise for desktop-devel@. I would allow them for release-team@, for sure, because the entire release

Re: New module in GNOME: gnome-internet-radio-locator

On Mon, May 21, 2018 at 1:16 PM, Ole Aamot wrote: What else do I have to do to mark the module gnome-internet-radio-locator for release in GNOME 3.29.2 unstable? Hi Ole, For GNOME 3.28, we severely downsized what we release to just a few core GNOME apps and

Re:

Hi Leslie, We received this from you earlier today. I haven't clicked the link. Was this a virus or something? Michael On Wed, May 16, 2018 at 5:21 PM, Leslie S Satenstein wrote: hi Release https://goo.gl/BMt54J Leslie S Satenstein

Re: Post release branching ?

+1 ___ release-team@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/release-team Release-team lurker? Do NOT participate in discussions.

Re: Freeze break request for libsoup

On Mon, Mar 12, 2018 at 5:32 AM, Matthias Clasen wrote: How about landing it right after the release, aiming for .1 ? Sure, that seems fine at this point. ___ release-team@gnome.org

Re: Freeze break request for libsoup

On Sun, Mar 11, 2018 at 11:26 AM, Matthias Clasen wrote: but nobody ever wants notifications from websites. Currently, if are signed in with a Google account and click the notification bubble on google.com, it takes ages to load, and eventually gives up with

Re: Freeze break request for libsoup

Hi, This one would be really nice to land, if we could get a second approval. I don't see much point in waiting until the .1 to loosen up our cookie policy. Thanks! Michael ___ release-team@gnome.org

Freeze break request for libsoup

Hi, A couple weeks ago, I pushed a patch to make the third-party cookie policy in libsoup less strict [1]. I asked Claudio to revert it immediately before the code freeze because Ting-Wei found a regression: it accidentally caused certain cookies (cookies with the domain property set to a

Re: GNOME Disks: Hard Freeze Break Request

+1 of 2 ___ release-team@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/release-team Release-team lurker? Do NOT participate in discussions.

Freeze break request

Hi, The following commit fixes a buffer overflow in epiphany's tests: https://git.gnome.org/browse/epiphany/commit/?id=0ad97baa47cd13c955e0873e52cf03b84ad4a620 May I backport it to the gnome-3-28 branch? Thanks, Michael ___ release-team@gnome.org

Re: Extra release team meeting?

No interest in this? No comments and no votes? This is surprising. :( ___ release-team@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/release-team Release-team lurker? Do NOT participate in discussions.

Extra release team meeting?

Hi, I'd like to propose holding an extra release team meeting soon. Normally the one we do once per year at GUADEC is sufficient, but as we're currently in the middle of a big transition from JHBuild to BuildStream, I think it'd be helpful to review how well this is going. There are some

Updated release wiki page

Hi release team, I've largely rewritten this wiki page: https://wiki.gnome.org/ReleasePlanning/MakingARelease with the goal of making it much simpler and easier to follow. I've also emphasized the process of building the entire core.bst project before uploading anything. References to

Re: [glib][GDateTime] API and string freeze break request

On Mon, Feb 12, 2018 at 1:54 PM, Rafal Luzynski wrote: Thank you. So here I have the feedback from the i18n team, as Alexandre said I don't need an approval yet. What about any feedback from the documentation and release team? Maybe I don't need an approval as

Re: How to handle release delay

On Mon, Feb 5, 2018 at 4:56 PM, mcatanz...@gnome.org wrote: * Release 3.27.90 next week, and skip 3.27.91. We'd have 3.27.90 on February 14, 3.27.92 on February 28, and 3.28.0 on March 7. Hi, If there are no objections, I'm going to announce this option. Michael

How to handle release delay

Hi, On IRC today, Javier and I agreed to delay the 3.27.90 release, since today was the tarball deadline and we didn't know how to generate tarballs using BuildStream. Now the question is, how to adjust the schedule to handle this? We have several options: * Release 3.27.90 next week, after

Re: Renaming gnome-tweak-tool to gnome-tweaks?

On Wed, Jan 10, 2018 at 8:25 AM, Jeremy Bicha wrote: Andrea wanted to make sure that the Release Team was ok with this renaming, so I'm emailing here. Seems fine to me. I trust you'll take care of whatever breaks as a result. Michael

Re: librsvg 2.42.0

Hi Federico, Can you clarify if you're going to stick to even/odd stable/unstable numbering, or if distros should now take every release as a stable release? You've previously advised that distros move to 2.41, so I assumed you were no longer using stable/unstable numbering. But now I'm not

Re: 3.26 retrospective

On Wed, Sep 20, 2017 at 4:50 AM, Allan Day wrote: Extend the UI freeze (or create a freeze period for major UI changes) and require that breaks get design approval. What would extending the freeze accomplish? We already have a long UI freeze (five weeks). Wouldn't extending

Yet another freeze break request for Epiphany

Hi, I've actually already released Epiphany 3.26.0 yesterday, but [1] was reported today and I think it's worth doing an Epiphany 3.26.0.1 release to get that fix in now. These patches fix the search engine management dialog, which unfortunately has been broken for the past couple of months.

Re: GNOME 3.25.91 released

On Wed, Aug 23, 2017 at 4:13 AM, Bastien Nocera wrote: The person releasing the GNOME releases usually also spins a new version of gnome-desktop so that the About section of the Settings has correct information. Can you please make sure this gets added to the checklist for

GNOME 3.25.91 released

Hi, GNOME 3.25.91, a late development preview of the upcoming GNOME 3.26 release, is now available. Please help us test it. If you want to compile GNOME 3.25.91 by yourself, you can use the jhbuild modulesets available here: https://download.gnome.org/teams/releng/3.25.91/ The lists of

Release team mailing list snafu

Hi, Due to some overaggressive spam filtering, all mails to release-team@gnome.org since early June were dropped. You will need to resend your messages. Sorry for the inconvenience. In particular, take note of this if you submitted a freeze break request. Michael

Re: Release schedule change affects GSoC projects

On Mon, May 15, 2017 at 6:35 AM, Andre Klapper wrote: I would not oppose moving "The Freeze" && 3.25.90 release to August 14th. I'd oppose making the entire release schedule (=3.26.0 release) a week longer though, as distributions need to rely on plans. Hm, I agree that we