fenics team mailing list archive

[Johan Hake <hake.dev@xxxxxxxxx>]

On 03/06/2013 10:42 AM, Garth N. Wells wrote:
> On 6 March 2013 07:31, Johan Hake <hake.dev@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> On 03/06/2013 08:08 AM, Garth N. Wells wrote:
>>> On 6 March 2013 06:56, Johan Hake <hake.dev@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>> I suggest we make 1.0.2, and 1.1.1 releases too, but I guess that was
>>>> already on your mind?
>>>>
>>>
>>> I think we should rationalise this. We want (a) to minimise the amount
>>> of work and (b) encourage users to update . I wouldn't bother with
>>> 1.1.1.
>>
>> Do you mean 1.1.1 or 1.0.2 or both? Then why do we bother backporting
>> bug fixes to these branches? I think as long as we do that we need to
>> release them too.
>>
> 
> I don't bother with back porting ;).

We have noticed ;)

> I would suggest we release more frequently and forget about back
> porting.  Do we really want to advocate users using one of three
> supported versions?  One is best, two is bearable.

Sounds reasonable, but it differ from the release model we have agreed
on. We could probably discuss this at FEniCS13.

Johan

> Garth
> 
>> This is not sustainable as it can quickly grow out of hands, so we need
>> to stop backporting at some stage. I suggest we stop backporting to a
>> branch when there exists a stable branch with a higher number. This mean
>> we stop backporting to 1.1.x after the 1.2.0 release. If this should
>> work we also need to make a point release from that branch before it
>> rendered backporting dead. If we do this we need to update our
>> development model with a another branch (1.2.x) and a chainsawed (1.1.x)
>> branch.
>>
>> I guess 1.0.x branch is a bit special as it is so tightly connected with
>> the book, and we therefore need to keep that for a while. That is our
>> LTS branch in Ubuntu terms.
>>
>> Johan
>>
>>> Garth
>>>
>>>> Johan
>>>>
>>>> On 03/05/2013 05:10 PM, Johannes Ring wrote:
>>>>> Hi all,
>>>>>
>>>>> It was suggested earlier today that we make a new release. No one has
>>>>> objected and I have been appointed as the release manager, so we are
>>>>> then at step four in the development model [1].
>>>>>
>>>>> Tomorrow, March 6, I will fork the development branches into 1.2.x
>>>>> branches [2] to prepare for the release of FEniCS 1.2. The buildbot
>>>>> will then be updated to build the 1.2.x branches, and when it is
>>>>> green, we can go ahead and make the release. Alternatively, we can
>>>>> wait one week as suggested by the development model. Development can
>>>>> of course continue in the development branches, but only bug fixes
>>>>> will be merged into the 1.2.x branches to be included in the 1.2
>>>>> release.
>>>>>
>>>>> [1] http://fenicsproject.org/contributing/development_model.html
>>>>> [2] DOLFIN, FFC, Instant, UFC (2.2.x) and UFL are needed
>>>>>
>>>>> Johannes
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~fenics
>>>>> Post to     : fenics@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>>>> Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~fenics
>>>>> More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~fenics
>>>> Post to     : fenics@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>>> Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~fenics
>>>> More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
>>