commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From S├ębastien Brisard <sebastien.bris...@m4x.org>
Subject Re: [Math] Towards the 3.1 release (take 3)
Date Wed, 28 Nov 2012 03:16:00 GMT
Hello,


2012/11/28 Phil Steitz <phil.steitz@gmail.com>

> On 11/27/12 1:24 PM, Thomas Neidhart wrote:
> > On 11/27/2012 04:30 PM, Gilles Sadowski wrote:
> >> Hello.
> >>
> >> Quoting from the previous thread about this subject:
> >>> As far as I am concerned, 3.1 could be released anytime now.
> >> [Luc Maisonobe, September 14, 2012]
> >>
> >> Plenty of needed work has been done since then. Most of it could have
> been
> >> done _after_ releasing 3.1!
> >> Most of the current contributors agree that releases should happen more
> >> often; yet they don't.
> >> I would like that a set of objective criteria be written down that would
> >> define when a new release is deemed adequate. [I had suggested some.]
> >> This discussion should be held in another thread since (as the above
> quote
> >> summarizes), it was agreed that the 3.1 release was due.
> >>
> >> At this point, I propose to start the release process using the "old"
> (about
> >> to be deprecated) procedure.
> >> Indeed, I surely do not want the release to be further delayed because
> of
> >> "newbie" mistakes on using the new procedure (CMS for the site, etc.).
> >> Let's "divide and conquer": We release 3.1 now and allow users to
> benefit
> >> from the many new features and bug fixes. While they test the new
> release,
> >> we begin to prepare 3.2 with the new procedure, starting with the site.
>
> +1
>
> Depending on how much happens bet 3.1 and the next one, we could
> consider a 3.1.1.
>
> I have some uncommitted stuff to address MATH-672, but I don't want
> to hold up the release for this.  If I can't get it finished before
> the first RC hits, I will get it in; otherwise it can wait.
>
I'm +1 too. I also have some uncommitted code for MATH-738. It will have to
wait, and I will in fact remove some recently committed code (the package
private functions in Gamma and Beta) as I was hopping for more tome to play
around with their interface and location (and scope, cf. other thread).
This was in fact committed too early, but since it is a lot of code to get
Beta right, I was thinking of committing incrementally.

Best regards,
S├ębastien

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message