sm-discuss AT lists.ibiblio.org
Subject: Public SourceMage Discussion List
List archive
- From: Arwed von Merkatz <v.merkatz AT gmx.net>
- To: SM Discuss <sm-discuss AT lists.ibiblio.org>
- Subject: Re: [SM-Discuss] next stable and stable-rc??
- Date: Thu, 2 Feb 2006 10:19:21 +0100
On Thu, Feb 02, 2006 at 10:11:15AM +0100, Pieter Lenaerts wrote:
> Op wo, 01-02-2006 te 16:53 -0800, schreef Eric Sandall:
> > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> > Hash: SHA1
> >
> > On Wed, 1 Feb 2006, Arwed von Merkatz wrote:
>
> > > Download verification failure (hash or signature) definitely need to be
> > > fixed before we move stable-rc to stable. Compile problems should be
> > > fixed. Other bugs might be delayable unless they're regressions from the
> > > current stable.
> > > If no one disagrees with that categorization I'll move all bugs that
> > > need to be fixed according to that to milestone 0.3 so we have a clear
> > > view what's still to be done.
>
> I think we should keep versions with serious runtime errors out of there
> too. imho there is no difference between a compile error and a runtime
> error from the user's point of view and stable is all about usability if
> you ask me
I agree as long as updating to a fixed version doesn't pull in half of
the test grimoire due to dependencies.
--
Arwed v. Merkatz Source Mage GNU/Linux developer
http://www.sourcemage.org
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] next stable and stable-rc??,
Karsten Behrmann, 02/01/2006
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] next stable and stable-rc??,
Arwed von Merkatz, 02/01/2006
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] next stable and stable-rc??,
Eric Sandall, 02/01/2006
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] next stable and stable-rc??,
Pieter Lenaerts, 02/02/2006
- Re: [SM-Discuss] next stable and stable-rc??, Arwed von Merkatz, 02/02/2006
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] next stable and stable-rc??,
Pieter Lenaerts, 02/02/2006
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] next stable and stable-rc??,
Eric Sandall, 02/01/2006
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] next stable and stable-rc??,
Arwed von Merkatz, 02/01/2006
Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.