[GRASS5] GRASS 5.0.1 released

[Bernhard Reiter]

On Wed, Jan 29, 2003 at 10:44:05AM +0100, Markus Neteler wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 28, 2003 at 07:46:19PM +0100, Bernhard Reiter wrote:
> > It was always the idea to stablise the 5.0 HEAD branch,
> > and release 5.0.1 from a fresh release branch.
> > We still should do this.
> 
> This is probably to late. Do you mean 5.0.2?

Yes, because it is the same idea.

> > Thus 5.0.1 from the old release branch was just intermediate
> > and for critical bugs.
> 
> Several important bugfixes didn't reach 5.0.1 due to the restrictions.

Well if they are really "important" 
as a maintainer you could declare them critical.

> > Thus we should go for 5.0.2 from 5.0 CVS HEAD.
> Right.
>  
> > And it is okay to fix real non-critical bugs for a 
> > in a 5.0.x release, but not if a release branch has been created.
> 
> In my opinion we should avoid subsubversions such as
> 5.0.0.x.

Agreed.

> > So if all bugs are fixed, make a release branch for 5.0.2.
> 
> Ok, who is doing that? Please keep in mind that this reuqires
> quite some work and time. Volunteers... ;-)

We would need somebody to coordinate the release.

> > On Tue, Jan 28, 2003 at 05:01:20PM +0100, Markus Neteler wrote:

> > The rule to only fix release critical bugs on a release branch
> > in itself is fine. 
> > We just have to go for a fresh release from the CVS HEAD sooner
> > which should be about bug fixes and minor feature enhancements only
> > anyway.
> 
> This is not clear to me, sorry. When creating a new branch from HEAD,
> all fixes including new features such as the long awaited datum
> transformation etc will reach it (or not?). Or do we count all
> as bug fixes and minor feature enhancements?

Once you create a release branch from the CVS HEAD,
that should only exist a short period of time
and only get critical bugfixes.
It contains all bug fixes and minor feature enhancements
which were done after the last release branch was branched.

Further bug fixes and minor features enhancements
will continue to go into HEAD and be contained in the next release branch.

This scheme will motivate us to keep the release branches short lived, 
because we want the bug fixes and features with the next releases.

> > This mostly means that the improvement can be delayed,
> > because most people don't care. 
> 
> Here we have to distinguish between
>  - developers who don't have time or who don't care
>  - users who care and are not able to compile CVS HEAD. Especially
>    for the users the slow release frequency is a problem:
> 
>    E.g. r.mapcalc was fixed weeks ago as well as NVIZ for tcl8.4. But
>    only a few people can benefit from this bugfix.
> 
> This problem we should resolve soon,

We should make it more easy and educate more interesting users 
to help testing prereleases and possible (still experimental) bug fixes.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/grass-dev/attachments/20030129/b48f5bc4/attachment.bin