From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Rob Browning Newsgroups: gmane.lisp.guile.devel Subject: Re: Stable releases Date: Thu, 23 Nov 2006 10:05:52 -0800 Message-ID: <87wt5mrqbj.fsf@raven.defaultvalue.org> References: <87bqn5n48n.fsf@ossau.uklinux.net> <8764dai81b.fsf@laas.fr> <871wnyf25z.fsf@raven.defaultvalue.org> <87mz6kea8c.fsf@ossau.uklinux.net> <87y7q3zjpe.fsf@laas.fr> NNTP-Posting-Host: main.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1164405879 7475 80.91.229.2 (24 Nov 2006 22:04:39 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 24 Nov 2006 22:04:39 +0000 (UTC) Cc: Guile Development Original-X-From: guile-devel-bounces+guile-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Fri Nov 24 23:04:31 2006 Return-path: Envelope-to: guile-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by ciao.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Gnj9C-0007Vq-Eg for guile-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 24 Nov 2006 23:03:51 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Gnj9B-0007ir-Mt for guile-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 24 Nov 2006 17:03:49 -0500 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1Gnj99-0007hz-1j for guile-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 24 Nov 2006 17:03:47 -0500 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1Gnj97-0007gW-46 for guile-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 24 Nov 2006 17:03:46 -0500 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Gnj96-0007gQ-UX for guile-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 24 Nov 2006 17:03:44 -0500 Original-Received: from [199.232.41.67] (helo=mx20.gnu.org) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS-1.0:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA:32) (Exim 4.52) id 1Gnj95-0006sh-Uj for guile-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 24 Nov 2006 17:03:44 -0500 Original-Received: from [70.85.129.156] (helo=defaultvalue.org) by mx20.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.52) id 1GnIyq-0000g7-FM for guile-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 23 Nov 2006 13:07:25 -0500 Original-Received: from omen.defaultvalue.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by defaultvalue.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 59AC290E86; Thu, 23 Nov 2006 10:05:53 -0800 (PST) Original-Received: from raven.defaultvalue.org (raven.defaultvalue.org [192.168.1.7]) by omen.defaultvalue.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 18567340A9; Thu, 23 Nov 2006 10:05:53 -0800 (PST) Original-Received: by raven.defaultvalue.org (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 00237355193; Thu, 23 Nov 2006 10:05:52 -0800 (PST) Original-To: Neil Jerram User-Agent: Gnus/5.110006 (No Gnus v0.6) Emacs/21.4 (gnu/linux) X-BeenThere: guile-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Developers list for Guile, the GNU extensibility library" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: guile-devel-bounces+guile-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: guile-devel-bounces+guile-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.lisp.guile.devel:6241 Archived-At: ludovic.courtes@laas.fr (Ludovic Court=E8s) writes: > Adding new C code (as is the case with the text collation bug) might > indeed break builds on some platforms. Yes. Also, for anyone who might not be thinking about it, it's probably worth keeping in mind that Guile builds on quite a few architectures, and our current release policy attempts to account for that by calling for the heaviest testing during the unstable to stable transitions (to hopefully catch any bugs related to endianness, pointer size, etc. that haven't been caught during the unstable development process). The assumption has been that any changes during a stable series will be be well enough controlled that they won't be nearly as likely to need that broader testing. > If this is the case, then it may be the case that the series can > hardly be regarded as "stable". Adding new Scheme modules, however, > is unlikely to break builds. I agree that it's certainly less likely, but here are some things we might want to consider: - This policy would raise a somewhat arbitrary implementation-related criteria for the addition of new features, i.e. "If you can write it in Scheme only, then it can go in, otherwise it has to wait." - Any added modules probably won't have been nearly as broadly tested as the rest of the modules in the tree. - A given stable release series would no longer map to a known and consistent set of features. i.e. One wouldn't be able to say with certainty that 1.8 doesn't have SRFI-N. --=20 Rob Browning rlb @defaultvalue.org and @debian.org; previously @cs.utexas.edu GPG starting 2002-11-03 =3D 14DD 432F AE39 534D B592 F9A0 25C8 D377 8C7E 7= 3A4 _______________________________________________ Guile-devel mailing list Guile-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/guile-devel