Re: 22.0 Release Status: Important news
[All FWIW from a non-contributor]
"Stephen J. Turnbull" wrote:
>>>>> "mb" == Martin Buchholz
<martin(a)xemacs.org> writes:
mb> XEmacs 21.2 CVS is shippable now, modulo a few little things
mb> like NEWS files and other documentation.
No, it's not. It will be Feb 1 at the earliest before I will be ready
to think about shipping this. I don't really have a good idea what it
is I have committed to shipping yet, let alone documents written about it.
mb> I suggest you not bother and simply ship what we have on
mb> Feb. 1.
Now _this_ is a truly crackpot idea! :-) You realize that all open
source development will come to a stop, perhaps for years, as the
entire community has a collective heart attack when a major app, an
Emacs, yet, is released a month ahead of schedule?
Nah! But freeze the "what" on 1 Feb. (Tomorrow) leaving yourself a month to
resolve any packaging and fiddling issues. That's the date on which to cut
the
new branch.
And, as others on this thread, it still confuses me that release tags should
go
backward when the release stabilizes. If it were me I would go to 21.3 (or 4)
--
part of the received "common wisdom" is that even numbered releases are
unlucky -- at least they are in commercial software. Or 22.<next>. Again,
with 20-20 hindsight and lots of evil memories I would have called the 22
betas 22.0.1 .. 22.0.99 leading toward 22.1.
I read the numbering discussion at the website. It left me still confused as
well
as in disagreement. Release engineering is something I've done in other
contexts
(Government work) and the "PR" aspect argues against anything that is not
obvious to the most casual observer.
--
David A. Cobb, Software Engineer, Public Access Advocate. Public Key at:
<http://pgpkeys.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=superbiskit>
"Don't buy or use crappy software"
"By the grace of God I am a Christian man,
by my actions a great sinner" -- The Way of a Pilgrim [R. M. French, tr.]