Stack 2013-02-22, 20:10
Elliott Clark 2013-02-22, 20:25
Stack 2013-02-23, 00:29
Elliott Clark 2013-02-23, 02:25
Stack 2013-02-23, 06:34
Stack 2013-02-26, 06:42
Nicolas Liochon 2013-02-22, 20:26
Stack 2013-02-22, 20:47
Nicolas Liochon 2013-02-22, 20:53
Andrew Purtell 2013-02-22, 21:20
Enis Söztutar 2013-02-22, 21:37
I am generally fine with branching.
Looking at the blocker / critical bug list for 0.96, the number of such
issues (39 as of writing of this email) increased compared to a few days
People marked their JIRAs this way so that their work gets picked up for
Considering that all the fixes for these issues would be integrated twice
once branching happens, I wonder if there should be a short buffer before
branching so that some of these high priority fixes can go in.
Just my two cents.
On Fri, Feb 22, 2013 at 12:10 PM, Stack <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I will branch this weekend. The branch will be called 0.95 rather than
> 0.96. The notion -- suggested in the past and brought up again at this
> weeks dev powwow -- is that we'll put out a 0.95.0 soon and mark it
> not-for-production use so folks have something to try early. We might do
> more 0.95.x releases than just the one. We did something similar with the
> 0.89 set of releases that preceded 0.90.
> When we think APIs and wire-format sufficiently stabilized, we'll then cut
> a 0.96 from the 0.95 branch and release 0.96.0, etc., from here on out.
> You all good w/ this?
Stack 2013-02-22, 20:56
Ted Yu 2013-02-22, 21:11
lars hofhansl 2013-02-23, 05:58
Jonathan Hsieh 2013-02-23, 06:14