[gentoo-portage-dev] New Portage release

[gentoo-portage-dev] New Portage release

[Fabian Groffen]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 708 bytes --]

Hey all,

I'm sorry if this has been discussed previously.  I admit not having
read all of the mails on this list recently.

Long story short: what are the plans on releasing 2.2.9?

Longer version: for Prefix I likely need a new release soon to get some
fixes out of the door.  Since I like to stay on par with mainline
portage's versioning here, I've been going along with mainline portage's
releases for a while, which worked fine.  Now we haven't got a release
for a long while, what's the plans here?  Is there anyone at all who
can/dares to spin a release?

Apologies in advance if this has been discussed recently.

Thanks,
Fabian

-- 
Fabian Groffen
Gentoo on a different level

[-- Attachment #2: Digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 195 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] New Portage release

[Tom Wijsman]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2858 bytes --]

On Sat, 8 Feb 2014 10:03:15 +0100
Fabian Groffen <grobian@gentoo.org> wrote:

> Hey all,

Hey Fabian, let's see what I can address to give you an idea, as I've
been busy in other areas than Portage and Gentoo lately note that I
don't necessarily speak for decisions of the team.

> I'm sorry if this has been discussed previously.  I admit not having
> read all of the mails on this list recently.

There's also impromptu chatter on IRC, but I haven't heard of it; greps
on a case-insensitive release, version, 2.2.9, 2.3 or 3.0 yield nothing.

> Long story short: what are the plans on releasing 2.2.9?

Under my impression the current way we work is to release when there is
a need to it; either a lot of fixes, a severe bug, a long time, ... At
least that's how we got to release 2.2.8.

<aside idea>
Though there have been some months between 2.2.7 and 2.2.8; so, maybe I
think we should try to release on a monthly basis if that's possible.
Just to ensure we do releases and don't forget about doing them. It
would be nice if there's like a maximum waiting time from the moment a
bug is set IN_PROGRESS; furthermore, this could allow us to say to the
user "This will be part of the next release this/next month.".
</aside idea>

> Longer version: for Prefix I likely need a new release soon to get
> some fixes out of the door.  Since I like to stay on par with mainline
> portage's versioning here, I've been going along with mainline
> portage's releases for a while, which worked fine.  Now we haven't
> got a release for a long while, ...

When you say "long while" here, do you mean the time between 2.2.7 and
2.2.8 or the time after 2.2.8? The previous version 2.2.7 was released
on 23 Sep 2013 and the current version 2.2.8 on 06 Jan 2014, there was
a huge time between both lasting several months; however, the time
after 2.2.8 is only slightly over a month.

> ..., what's the plans here? Is there anyone at all who can/dares to
> spin a release?

Since we've managed to release 2.2.8; I guess that if the Portage team
agrees, we can/dare to spin a new release. But that would depend on if
we have enough / important fixes [1], what we still want to add to this
release (no idea, but people are busy on all some patches), ...

 [1]: https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=484436

> Apologies in advance if this has been discussed recently.
> 
> Thanks,
> Fabian

Thanks for bringing this up, given it has been a month it is certainly
an interesting matter to come up for discussion again; I guess we can
discuss this at the end of the Portage meeting that happens later today.

-- 
With kind regards,

Tom Wijsman (TomWij)
Gentoo Developer

E-mail address  : TomWij@gentoo.org
GPG Public Key  : 6D34E57D
GPG Fingerprint : C165 AF18 AB4C 400B C3D2  ABF0 95B2 1FCD 6D34 E57D

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 490 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] New Portage release

[Brian Dolbec]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1221 bytes --]

On Sat, 8 Feb 2014 10:03:15 +0100
Fabian Groffen <grobian@gentoo.org> wrote:

> Hey all,
> 
> I'm sorry if this has been discussed previously.  I admit not having
> read all of the mails on this list recently.
> 
> Long story short: what are the plans on releasing 2.2.9?
> 
> Longer version: for Prefix I likely need a new release soon to get
> some fixes out of the door.  Since I like to stay on par with mainline
> portage's versioning here, I've been going along with mainline
> portage's releases for a while, which worked fine.  Now we haven't
> got a release for a long while, what's the plans here?  Is there
> anyone at all who can/dares to spin a release?
> 
> Apologies in advance if this has been discussed recently.
> 
> Thanks,
> Fabian
> 

I hadn't thought about 2.2.9 just yet.  We are having a meeting
tomorrow at Feb. 9, 19:00 UTC in #gentoo-meetings, join us and we can
discuss it more with the others.  There have been a few bug fixes, but
I don't know if there is some others that should be dealt with before a
2.2.9 release.

If you can't attend the meeting, at least I will have a better idea of
when we will be able to do a release.

-- 
Brian Dolbec <dolsen>


[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 620 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] New Portage release

[Sebastian Luther]

Am 08.02.2014 10:03, schrieb Fabian Groffen:
> Hey all,
> 
> I'm sorry if this has been discussed previously.  I admit not having
> read all of the mails on this list recently.
> 
> Long story short: what are the plans on releasing 2.2.9?

I think there aren't any plans atm.

> 
> Longer version: for Prefix I likely need a new release soon to get some
> fixes out of the door.  Since I like to stay on par with mainline
> portage's versioning here, I've been going along with mainline portage's
> releases for a while, which worked fine.  Now we haven't got a release
> for a long while, what's the plans here?  Is there anyone at all who
> can/dares to spin a release?
> 

The approach with 2.2.8 was to do it once someone sees the need to do
it. I think that's just a reasonable approach we could continue to use.
I don't see a problem with releasing 2.2.9 if you want that for prefix.

> Apologies in advance if this has been discussed recently.
> 
> Thanks,
> Fabian
>