From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Pjotr Prins Subject: Re: [PATCH] gnu: Add ldc-1.1.0-beta6 Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2017 11:02:12 +0000 Message-ID: <20170119110212.GA22866@mail.thebird.nl> References: <87y3ykmh23.fsf@gnu.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:58995) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cUAWl-0002va-Kk for guix-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 19 Jan 2017 06:05:12 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cUAWg-00031v-Of for guix-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 19 Jan 2017 06:05:11 -0500 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <87y3ykmh23.fsf@gnu.org> List-Id: "Development of GNU Guix and the GNU System distribution." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sender: "Guix-devel" To: Ludovic =?iso-8859-1?Q?Court=E8s?= Cc: guix-devel@gnu.org, Frederick Muriithi On Mon, Jan 09, 2017 at 03:41:40PM +0100, Ludovic Court=C3=A8s wrote: > Overall the patch looks good to me. >=20 > One question: We usually avoid packaging software that has no release o= r > has an =E2=80=9Calpha=E2=80=9D or =E2=80=9Cbeta=E2=80=9D label. Do you= think we could wait for 1.1.0 to > be officially released? Or are there good reasons why we should not > wait? ldc is pretty stable and there are many commits since the last stable release which are needed. Normally we should support 1.0.0, but since that is more than 6 months old I think we can skip that. Next round will be stable 1.1.0 (I am building a git checkout right now because I need the recent stack trace fix!).=20 In all I suggest we support 1.1.0-beta6 and then on to 1.1.0 etc. We can add new beta's on top of that again for those who want it. Pj.