Sounds good to me. Does the DLR version still need to be bumped? - Jeff
On Sun, Jan 30, 2011 at 1:37 PM, Tomas Matousek <tomas.matou...@microsoft.com> wrote: > I propose we sync IronRuby releases with IronPython as follows: > > IronRuby - IronPython - date > 1.1.2 - Beta 2 - February 6 > none - RC1 - February 20 > none - RC2 - February 27 > 1.1.3 - RTM - March 6 > > Tomas > > -----Original Message----- > From: users-boun...@lists.ironpython.com > [mailto:users-boun...@lists.ironpython.com] On Behalf Of Jeff Hardy > Sent: Friday, January 28, 2011 3:39 PM > To: Discussion of IronPython > Subject: [IronPython] Proposed Release Schedule for 2.7 > > I'd like to propose the following release schedule for IronPython 2.7: > > Beta 2 - February 6 > RC1 - February 20 > RC2 - February 27 > RTM - March 6 > > The need for a Beta 3 release could push those dates back by up to two weeks. > Also, I may reevaluate based on the rate of bugs being fixed - if lots of > fixes are coming in, delaying the release may be worthwhile. Obviously, any > showstoppers would have an affect as while, but I don't believe there are any > of those at the moment. The only current blocker for release is that the test > suite does not pass 100%. > That will need to be sorted prior to RTM. > > It's an aggressive schedule, but I think IronPython has gone too long without > a release. I'm expecting there to be 2.7.x releases every 4-6 weeks if there > are sufficient contributions (like new modules). > > I want to get the 2.x series behind us so that work can begin on 3.2/3.3. > Compatibility with 3.x is going to be much better than 2.x, and with most > Python stuff needing porting effort anyway getting IronPython support will be > easier. That's going to require some work in the innards, and I'm not sure > too many people are familiar with those parts or IronPython yet. > > I've already updated the version numbers to Beta 2 and fixed the installer > bugs that prevented Beta 1 from installing over Alpha 1. At this point, the > bugs that get fixed will probably be the ones that have patches, or at least > solid repros, attached to them. > > If you've got a bug that you think *must* be fixed, bring it up here. > > Does anyone else think this is doable? > > - Jeff > _______________________________________________ > Users mailing list > Users@lists.ironpython.com > http://lists.ironpython.com/listinfo.cgi/users-ironpython.com > > _______________________________________________ > Users mailing list > Users@lists.ironpython.com > http://lists.ironpython.com/listinfo.cgi/users-ironpython.com > _______________________________________________ Users mailing list Users@lists.ironpython.com http://lists.ironpython.com/listinfo.cgi/users-ironpython.com
