Re: [boost] Re: [1.33.0] Release schedule suggestion

From: Victor A. Wagner Jr. (vawjr_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-04-04 20:35:22

At Monday 2005-04-04 14:13, you wrote:

>"Peter Dimov" <pdimov_at_[hidden]> escribió en el mensaje
>news:004d01c53761$6413ecf0$6501a8c0_at_pdimov2...
> > Victor A. Wagner Jr. wrote:
> >> At Friday 2005-04-01 15:17, you wrote:
> >>> Here's my suggestion for a release schedule. We allow two weeks to
> >>> get all of the new features and bug-fixes we want into CVS, but still
> >>> try to
> >>> keep things sane. Then we fix bugs on the CVS trunk for a week,
> >>> branch and fix bugs for another week, and then release on May 1. So,
> >>> the important dates are: April 15 (two weeks from today): feature-freeze
> >>> on CVS trunk.
> >>> April 22 (three weeks from today): branch for 1.33.0
> >>
> >> I'll say this again.... if you branch, branch the development that's
> >> NOT related to 1.33.0
> >
> > I'll agree again. The changes I check in when we are in release mode (have
> > a release branch active) _always_ go to both the trunk and the branch. The
> > branch doesn't help me in any way.
> >
> > Apr 15: feature freeze
> > Release "when it's done"
> >
>FWIW, I agree.
>In fact, it took some time to understand our current model becasue I had my
>mind setup with release-THEN-branch.
>I just couldn't get into the idea of working on something else than a
>release (once the release is sheduled). Even in my own projects, I never
>move past a release without finishing it first; so I couldn't understood why
>was there an early branch. As Peter, I just have to _always_ propagate my
>work into the Release branch simply becasue I wouldn't be working on
>anything but the release until it's finish.
>In the odd event that I have something terribly hot that I can't wait to
>commit for a post-release version, I would just keep it in my disk.

A problem that occurs is that some portion of the libraries may be all set 
to go for 1.33.  The people who work on that want to start on 1.34 and have 
_nothing_ to do with any of the rest of the library.   Given the diverse 
nature of how the boost libraries interconnect, it's amazing to me that we 
want to release the entire thing at _any_ point.  Be that as it may, 
there's apparently going to be an official 1.33.0 "release" and folks 
working on other things (that ARE in 1.33, but will be updated in 1.34) 
justifiably want to work on THIER stuff.  They need to put their work 
someplace.  Therefore creating a branch point is likely required.

>Just my 2c
>
>Fernando Cacciola
>SciSoft
>
>
>
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost

Victor A. Wagner Jr.      http://rudbek.com
The five most dangerous words in the English language:
               "There oughta be a law"