harmony-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Mark Hindess <mark.hind...@googlemail.com>
Subject Re: [general] freeze for M5.5_Eclipse_TPTP
Date Thu, 24 Apr 2008 10:56:53 GMT

In message <481063C6.7050503@gmail.com>, Tim Ellison writes:
> Mark Hindess wrote:
> > I agree with Tim on this issue.  I think making a release, with the
> > testing, evaluation and voting involved, should not be something that
> > downstream projects dictate.  Doing this release would seem to set a
> > precedent that I would not be happy with.
> > 
> > I would be inclined to vote -1 for any formal release that isn't simply
> > the next milestone release.  Of course, this is not necessarily my final
> > decision.
> > 
> > The downstream project should use our current release or if they have
> > a desperate need for something more recent then they should be more
> > flexible.
> Just to be clear about my views -- I have no objection if we choose to
> effectively freeze new feature work in the verifier so that Eclipse
> can take a copy of the source code at a well-defined revision number
> with some assurance from us that it is not in a great state of flux.

I agree.  Taking source code, rather than a binary, in this manner is

> However, if we are going to produce a formal milestone, that has
> undergone the testing, checking, signing, and distribution via ASF
> mirrors then we owe it to all our users for that to be the best
> quality we can produce.  And that means the feature freeze, code
> freeze, test and voting cycle that we have established for the
> project.

And any binary release should follow this process (even if it is only a
partial release of the verifier).


View raw message