Time for a 4.8.4 release
woodbri at SWOODBRIDGE.COM
Tue Jul 11 00:59:50 EDT 2006
Well fine then release it here is my +1,
but WHEN is the time to ask for fixes or to review open bugs for
potential inclusion in maintenance releases. There is never any urgency
around fixes until someone talks about a release. I don't think these
are so much favorite wishes as much as legitimate request for known bugs
to be fixed. I'm happy to debate if a bug should or should not be part
of a major, minor or dot release.
Daniel Morissette wrote:
> Please stop asking for last minute additions, that's not the right time,
> and that's why 4.8.4 was not released last time: My previous proposal
> was to take whatever was in the 4.8.x branch at the time of my post and
> to release that (and exactly that) as 4.8.4, but most (all?) votes came
> with a caveat that they wanted a release if [add your favorite wish
> here]... I took that as a NO vote since I didn't have time to address
> those wishes and never proceeded with the release.
> I agree with SteveL that we should release 4.8.4, so I will once again
> propose that we release what is *currently* in the 4.8 CVS branch as
> 4.8.4 this week. My proposal does NOT include room for last minute
> wishes, we take what's there and release it, other bugs can always go in
> 4.8.5 or later.
> I start with a +1 vote.
> Stephen Woodbridge wrote:
>> There are a few php/mapscript functions that are missing from the swig
>> interface that I posted about. If I find the post and write a bug, can
>> they get included in a 4.8.4?
>> I'll find it and write the ticket regardless.
>> Steve Lime wrote:
>>> Seems we never did commit to doing this. Probably still a good idea
>>>>>> Daniel Morissette <dmorissette at MAPGEARS.COM> 06/22/06 12:35 PM >>>
>>> Bart van den Eijnden (OSGIS) wrote:
>>>> Daniel, talking of releases, is there a timeline to fix the unique
>>>> filenames problem with using PHP/Mapscript as an Apache module? This
>>>> is a
>>>> really critical issue in my opinion.
>>> Unfortunately I never encountered this problem myself, that and the
>>> lack of interest from anyone to fund this fix explains why it's still
>>> there. I'll pop it back to the top of my list, but wouldn't wait on
>>> that for 4.8.4.
More information about the mapserver-dev