From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Thien-Thi Nguyen Newsgroups: gmane.lisp.guile.devel Subject: Re: The 1.6.1 release. Date: Wed, 03 Apr 2002 02:37:02 -0800 Sender: guile-devel-admin@gnu.org Message-ID: References: <87ofi5qm4a.fsf@raven.i.defaultvalue.org> <87r8mxs5t8.fsf@tyrell.bad-people-of-the-future.san-francisco.ca.us> <87lmc8fp24.fsf@raven.i.defaultvalue.org> Reply-To: ttn@glug.org NNTP-Posting-Host: localhost.gmane.org X-Trace: main.gmane.org 1017830549 1366 127.0.0.1 (3 Apr 2002 10:42:29 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@main.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 3 Apr 2002 10:42:29 +0000 (UTC) Cc: evan@glug.org, guile-devel@gnu.org, guile-user@gnu.org Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([199.232.76.164]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1 (Debian)) id 16siDl-0000Lv-00 for ; Wed, 03 Apr 2002 12:42:29 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=fencepost.gnu.org) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 3.34 #1 (Debian)) id 16siDO-0003WG-00; Wed, 03 Apr 2002 05:42:06 -0500 Original-Received: from ca-crlsbd-u4-c4c-174.crlsca.adelphia.net ([68.66.186.174] helo=giblet) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 3.34 #1 (Debian)) id 16siBS-0003KG-00; Wed, 03 Apr 2002 05:40:06 -0500 Original-Received: from ttn by giblet with local (Exim 3.33 #1 (Debian)) id 16si8U-0002ks-00; Wed, 03 Apr 2002 02:37:02 -0800 Original-To: rlb@defaultvalue.org In-Reply-To: <87lmc8fp24.fsf@raven.i.defaultvalue.org> (message from Rob Browning on Sun, 31 Mar 2002 14:41:07 -0600) Errors-To: guile-devel-admin@gnu.org X-BeenThere: guile-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.8 Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: Developers list for Guile, the GNU extensibility library List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.lisp.guile.devel:289 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.lisp.guile.devel:289 From: Rob Browning Date: Sun, 31 Mar 2002 14:41:07 -0600 As a practical definition, I'd love to see it move to the point where being ready for release was more just a matter of making sure all the release-critical TODO items had been done (which would include references into the bug tree), and that "make check" would complete without error on the "primary platforms". In particular, I'd like to see items added to "make check" whenever we have important problems that need fixing -- *before* we fix them. This wouldn't be appropriate for all problems, but for many I suspect it would. why don't you add this to build/release.text and fill it out w/ related process? i think it's safe to say that whoever writes release.text has the most say in the release process. since you're doing the release it makes more sense for you to do it than for me. (i'm a lazy bastard, too. ;-) thi _______________________________________________ Guile-devel mailing list Guile-devel@gnu.org http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/guile-devel