From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Stephen Leake Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Release process (was Re: Move to a cadence release model?) Date: Wed, 11 Nov 2015 04:45:18 -0600 Message-ID: <86mvuk4xxd.fsf@stephe-leake.org> References: <8337wdn6uu.fsf@gnu.org> <86611975jo.fsf_-_@stephe-leake.org> <838u65kxly.fsf@gnu.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1447239121 4976 80.91.229.3 (11 Nov 2015 10:52:01 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 11 Nov 2015 10:52:01 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org, john@yates-sheets.org To: Eli Zaretskii Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed Nov 11 11:51:49 2015 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1ZwT0G-000852-3f for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 11 Nov 2015 11:51:48 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:39398 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZwT0F-0000ol-Cn for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 11 Nov 2015 05:51:47 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:50918) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZwSy5-00008V-N5 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 11 Nov 2015 05:51:44 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZwSuK-0007eA-BE for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 11 Nov 2015 05:49:33 -0500 Original-Received: from gproxy1-pub.mail.unifiedlayer.com ([69.89.25.95]:34468) by eggs.gnu.org with smtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZwSuK-0007cL-4d for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 11 Nov 2015 05:45:40 -0500 Original-Received: (qmail 12676 invoked by uid 0); 11 Nov 2015 10:45:36 -0000 Original-Received: from unknown (HELO cmgw3) (10.0.90.84) by gproxy1.mail.unifiedlayer.com with SMTP; 11 Nov 2015 10:45:36 -0000 Original-Received: from host114.hostmonster.com ([74.220.207.114]) by cmgw3 with id gHlM1r00F2UdiVW01HlQkp; Wed, 11 Nov 2015 10:45:33 -0700 X-Authority-Analysis: v=2.1 cv=Caqbutbl c=1 sm=1 tr=0 a=CQdxDb2CKd3SRg4I0/XZPQ==:117 a=CQdxDb2CKd3SRg4I0/XZPQ==:17 a=DsvgjBjRAAAA:8 a=f5113yIGAAAA:8 a=9i_RQKNPAAAA:8 a=hEr_IkYJT6EA:10 a=x_XPkuGwIRMA:10 a=qtqOOiqGOCEA:10 a=mDV3o1hIAAAA:8 a=KKJGLXew9N7TztHIC-wA:9 Original-Received: from [76.218.37.33] (port=57744 helo=TAKVER2) by host114.hostmonster.com with esmtpa (Exim 4.84) (envelope-from ) id 1ZwSu3-0001Gt-Ai; Wed, 11 Nov 2015 03:45:23 -0700 In-Reply-To: <838u65kxly.fsf@gnu.org> (Eli Zaretskii's message of "Wed, 11 Nov 2015 05:45:29 +0200") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.5 (windows-nt) X-Identified-User: {2442:host114.hostmonster.com:stephele:stephe-leake.org} {sentby:smtp auth 76.218.37.33 authed with stephen_leake@stephe-leake.org} X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 3.x X-Received-From: 69.89.25.95 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:194051 Archived-At: Eli Zaretskii writes: >> From: Stephen Leake >> Which is precisely why we have a feature freeze phase; it enforces this >> desire. > > We cannot enforce it. Well, the feature freeze encourages developers to work on the release more than a non-feature freeze model does. At least, it works that way for me. >> I know I would be _very_ tempted to ignore the release branch, to keep >> working on my latest Cool Feature instead. >> >> If I know I have to wait for a release before I can merge to master >> again, I'll work on the release as much as I can. > > These considerations will become valid only when we have enough > developers paying attention to bugs that are reported. (That includes > you, Stephen, btw.) Yes. I don't scan the bug tool for bugs that I might be able to work on; sometimes it seems I should. For now, I rely on someone interested in the bug emailing me if they think I could help. Is there a way to get an email for every new bug? I don't see anything on the debbugs pages, but I didn't look very hard. I'm curious how much traffic that would be. During the last feature freeze, there were reminders on this list of the bugs that were deemed release-critical. I looked at all of those bugs, and decided I could not usefully contribute to fixing them. This time around, I would argue that "fix the byte-compiler errors in cedet/*" is a release-critical bug, and I will work on that. I have already offered to, but I'm waiting for Eric to organize the effort. It needs to wait until he finishes his final merge to master. There may be other release-critical bugs that I can usefully work on. I don't have statistics on how well the feature-freeze model works in getting release-critical bugs fixed. Have we had other release models in the past? did they work any better? I do know that these same discussions were had at the start of the last feature-freeze. So a document that records the rationale for the release process would be useful. -- -- Stephe