Hans de Goede writes:
Looks like all of these have been merged, thanks for tracking what
remained to be done!
> https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/106849/
> https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/106850/
>
> https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/105350/
>
On 09/13/2016 10:27 PM, Timo Aaltonen wrote:
On 09.09.2016 20:18, Aaron Plattner wrote:
On 09/06/2016 12:27 PM, Keith Packard wrote:
Adam Jackson writes:
... move the non-critical bug deadline to 2016-10-01? Still leaves
three weeks for critical fixes. Either way, looks
Keith Packard writes:
> [ Unknown signature status ]
>
> Following the 'release early and often' mantra, we should probably get
> 1.19 out the door and let people start using the new code.
>
> I'd like to propose that we figure out what remaining non-bug changes
> we'd like to
On 09.09.2016 20:18, Aaron Plattner wrote:
> On 09/06/2016 12:27 PM, Keith Packard wrote:
>> Adam Jackson writes:
>>
>>> ... move the non-critical bug deadline to 2016-10-01? Still leaves
>>> three weeks for critical fixes. Either way, looks plausible to me. I
>>> don't personally
On 09/06/2016 12:27 PM, Keith Packard wrote:
> Adam Jackson writes:
>
>> ... move the non-critical bug deadline to 2016-10-01? Still leaves
>> three weeks for critical fixes. Either way, looks plausible to me. I
>> don't personally have any non-bug changes I want to land before
Please consider reviewing my latest Xephyr patches (at least the latest one
- I'm afraid things may break in Xephyr running in mui-seat mode after
Keith's new event-handling API):
https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/89109/
https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/89110/
Adam Jackson writes:
> ... move the non-critical bug deadline to 2016-10-01? Still leaves
> three weeks for critical fixes. Either way, looks plausible to me. I
> don't personally have any non-bug changes I want to land before 1.19.
Yeah, sounds good. We don't usually get many
On Fri, 2016-09-02 at 00:33 -0500,
> Following the 'release early and often' mantra, we should probably get
> 1.19 out the door and let people start using the new code.
>
> I'd like to propose that we figure out what remaining non-bug changes
> we'd like to get merged in the next week (or two?),
Hi,
On 06-09-16 05:23, Keith Packard wrote:
Hans de Goede writes:
That is quick :) Fine by me, but I've a whole bunch of
modesetting / prime patches (all bugfixes really) I would like to get in
before then.
As you can see, bug fixes are welcome until 9-24. All that
On 02/09/16 02:33 PM, Keith Packard wrote:
>
> Following the 'release early and often' mantra, we should probably get
> 1.19 out the door and let people start using the new code.
I wholeheartedly agree with this sentiment!
> I'd like to propose that we figure out what remaining non-bug changes
On Sun, Sep 04, 2016 at 11:18:24AM +0200, Hans de Goede wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 02-09-16 07:33, Keith Packard wrote:
> >
> > Following the 'release early and often' mantra, we should probably get
> > 1.19 out the door and let people start using the new code.
> >
> > I'd like to propose that we
Hans de Goede writes:
> That is quick :) Fine by me, but I've a whole bunch of
> modesetting / prime patches (all bugfixes really) I would like to get in
> before then.
As you can see, bug fixes are welcome until 9-24. All that closes 9-10
is new feature development. If
Hi,
On 02-09-16 07:33, Keith Packard wrote:
Following the 'release early and often' mantra, we should probably get
1.19 out the door and let people start using the new code.
I'd like to propose that we figure out what remaining non-bug changes
we'd like to get merged in the next week (or
Following the 'release early and often' mantra, we should probably get
1.19 out the door and let people start using the new code.
I'd like to propose that we figure out what remaining non-bug changes
we'd like to get merged in the next week (or two?), then move into a
non-critical bug fix period
14 matches
Mail list logo