dolfin team mailing list archive

[Anders Logg <logg@xxxxxxxxx>]

On Wed, Feb 23, 2011 at 06:43:36PM +0000, Garth N. Wells wrote:
>
>
> On 23/02/11 18:35, Anders Logg wrote:
> > On Wed, Feb 23, 2011 at 10:26:24AM -0800, Johan Hake wrote:
> >> On Wednesday February 23 2011 09:08:26 Anders Logg wrote:
> >>> On Wed, Feb 23, 2011 at 05:03:41PM +0000, Garth N. Wells wrote:
> >>>> On 23/02/11 16:59, Anders Logg wrote:
> >>>>> On Wed, Feb 23, 2011 at 04:40:09PM +0000, Garth N. Wells wrote:
> >>>>>> On 23/02/11 16:35, Anders Logg wrote:
> >>>>>>> Is it time to stop pushing so we don't make any last minute breaking
> >>>>>>> before the release?
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> I can stop - the pushes were somewhat related to a bug fix.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Great! If you feel the urge to push, you can always push to
> >>>>> ~dolfin-core/dolfin/wells. ;-)
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Did you just restart the buildbots? I was going to. Anyway, let's wait
> >>>>> until they are green and then make the release.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I can do the other releases in the meantime. Which packages need
> >>>>> release?
> >>>>>
> >>>>>   FFC     0.9.5
> >>>>>   UFC     2.0.0
> >>>>>   UFL     0.6.0 (or 1.0?)
> >>>>>   Viper   0.6.0 (or 1.0?)
> >>>>>   Instant 0.9.9 (or 1.0?)
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Since we are releasing DOLFIN 1.0 shortly, it might also be good to
> >>>>> bump the version numbers of some of the other packages. It would be
> >>>>> good to get some comments from the main authors of UFL, Viper, Instant.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> The main plan could then be to only make new releases of DOLFIN and
> >>>>> (maybe) FFC in a month. The other packages have then already be
> >>>>> released so we don't need to bother with those (unless we make bug fix
> >>>>> releases).
> >>>>
> >>>> Instant needs a critical fix to allow the calling program to pass the
> >>>> SWIG executable, so I wouldn't bump it to 1.0.
> >>
> >> Agree.
> >>
> >>>> There are a few other significant issues that may requires changes to
> >>>> various packages, so let's not bump any version numbers just yet.
> >>>
> >>> ok, except for UFC then.
> >>>
> >>> How about bumping to 0.9.9 (for FFC, FIAT, Viper, UFL)?
> >>
> >> I suggest bumping just one pointversion. Why should we bump all to 0.9.9?
> >
> > To indicate that 1.0 is near.
> >
> > FFC will be 0.9.9. Then 1.0 will be released alongside DOLFIN 1.0.
> >
>
> Let's keep the numbering, and bump it a couple of weeks. I suggest that
> we focus on bug fixes in coming period, and make new bug fix releases in
> a few weeks as a precursor to 1.0.

Since I haven't heard from the main authors of UFL, Viper etc, I will
keep the numbers, but FFC will be 0.9.9. It's no problem making
0.9.10 etc if we should need it.

--
Anders