Hi there,

On Tue, 05 Jun 2012 03:53:19 -0400 Tres Seaver wrote:

> On 06/05/2012 03:28 AM, Michael Howitz wrote:
>> Am 04.06.2012 um 18:30 schrieb Uli Fouquet: […]
>>> Also updated the 0.6 branch in SVN. Hope that's okay.
>> I think there should not be a 0.6 branch as the trunk is still on
>> 0.6.*. Usually we only create maintenance branches for non-current
>> releases.

Yes, the existence of such a branch surprised me too.

> That isn't true any longer for the ZTK packages:  I added maintenance
> branches for all the versions used by ZTK 1.0 / 1.1, and switched the
> development checkouts for 1.0 / 1.1. to use them.  Without that change,
> the stop-energy of "breaking" a dev build for 1.0 / 1.1 was interfering
> with ongoing development.

I see, interesting. But that means a stop-energy for releasing any
bugfix release of ZTK packages, doesn't it? At least that seems to be
the case if even such minimal changes, that do not change the package
API at all, are considered to break the ZTK.

I also wonder a bit, why it is neccessary to maintain a 'ZTK-branch'
named like a regular maintenance branch, at least for maintenance
branches that match the trunk version. Shouldn't that be named
'ztk-compat', 'ztk-1.0-compat' or similar then?

Beside this I thought one major point of dev-builds for ZTKs is to _see_
changes in ongoing development of packages that break ZTK-compatibility.
Now you can see such breakages only after a release and when these
maintenance branches were updated (or, of course, if one does the ztk
tests with local changes before release, which I did - without any issues).

> In this case, version 0.6.1 of the zope.file package was included in ZTK
> 1.0, but dropped from the ZTK before 1.1.  I'm pretty sure the changes
> Uli added should *not* be propagated into another ZTK 1.0 release:  I
> think they might break apps deployed against ZTK 1.0:  Because of the BBB
> concerns, I think we may need to re-release a 0.6.3 which reverts the 0.6
> branch back to the 0.6.1 state, and make Uli's new stuff available as a
> 0.7.0 release.

As the menu config has not gone from 0.6.2 but is only activated
conditionally, I am relatively sure, that there are no BBB problems with
0.6.2. Everyone who used 0.6.1 should also be able to use 0.6.2 without
any changes to local apps/configs. Or did I miss something here?

The (unconditional) _removal_ of menu configuration might indeed be part
of some 0.7.x or even 1.0 release, just as Leo suggested. But that
didn't happen yet.

I also ran ztk tests (Linux/64bit, Python2.7) with 0.6.2 against ZTKs
1.0, 1.0.7, 1.0dev and got exactly same errors as with 0.6.1 (mainly
related to Python version, no hints to problems with 0.6.2).

I am not strictly against reverting all the stuff and going to 0.7, but
'pinning' a package version this way and for these reasons seems, hm,
not very effective to me.

Best regards,


Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Zope-Dev maillist  -  Zope-Dev@zope.org
**  No cross posts or HTML encoding!  **
(Related lists -
 https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )

Reply via email to