Major code changes deadline approaching
Boosters, The deadline for "major code changes" for 1.42 is Monday, January 4, 2010. Please try to get all big features merged to release branch by that date, and let the release team know if there are any issues. The next deadline will be Jan 11, when the release branch will be closed for all changes, except by explicit permission. -- The Release Managers, Beman Dawes Daniel James Eric Niebler Rene Rivera Vladimir Prus
On Dec 27, 2009, at 11:21 AM, Vladimir Prus wrote:
Boosters,
The deadline for "major code changes" for 1.42 is Monday, January 4, 2010. Please try to get all big features merged to release branch by that date, and let the release team know if there are any issues.
The next deadline will be Jan 11, when the release branch will be closed for all changes, except by explicit permission.
-- The Release Managers,
Beman Dawes Daniel James Eric Niebler Rene Rivera Vladimir Prus
I'd just like to point out that we have 28 open tickets marked as "Showstoppers": https://svn.boost.org/trac/boost/report/29 and 14 open tickets marked as "Regressions": https://svn.boost.org/trac/boost/report/30 -- Marshall
Marshall Clow wrote:
On Dec 27, 2009, at 11:21 AM, Vladimir Prus wrote:
Boosters,
The deadline for "major code changes" for 1.42 is Monday, January 4, 2010. Please try to get all big features merged to release branch by that date, and let the release team know if there are any issues.
The next deadline will be Jan 11, when the release branch will be closed for all changes, except by explicit permission.
-- The Release Managers,
Beman Dawes Daniel James Eric Niebler Rene Rivera Vladimir Prus
I'd just like to point out that we have 28 open tickets marked as "Showstoppers": https://svn.boost.org/trac/boost/report/29
Well, given that half of them is more than 6 months old, they cannot be all true show stoppers. Unfortunately, the severity of the issue typically represents submitter opinion, and not maintainer position about priority of a fix. That said, of course it would be nice if everybody looked at that list and try to do something. - Volodya
Am Sunday 27 December 2009 22:16:00 schrieb Vladimir Prus:
I'd just like to point out that we have 28 open tickets marked as "Showstoppers": https://svn.boost.org/trac/boost/report/29
Well, given that half of them is more than 6 months old, they cannot be all true show stoppers. Unfortunately, the severity of the issue typically represents submitter opinion, and not maintainer position about priority of a fix. That said, of course it would be nice if everybody looked at that list and try to do something.
I looked into the regressions. I did not try to confirm or fix the bugs, but only put together the information that is in the reports and the changelogs from the trunk. almost half of them can be closed or the regression flag removed imho, but I did NOT make any changes to Trac, as I don't want to tinker with release critical bugs before a deadline, although I'm pretty sure about some of them. here we go: Confirmed regressions: (based on information in reports only, not tested) #2409: 1.35 -> 1.36 optional #2649: 1.34 -> 1.36 range #2650: 1.36 -> 1.37 test (documentation only) #3318: 1.36 -> 1.39 python #3526: 1.34 -> 1.37 thread #3668: 1.38 -> 1.41 intrusive #3688: 1.38 -> 1.41 intrusive Fixed, but still open in Trac: #3010: iostreams. fixed. fixed according to author. #2154: iostreams. probably fixed. the function in question(futimes()) is not in the trunk any more. log from Rev 57607 that removed it: "This file is dead and is the only remaining place mentioning the futimes function mentioned in #2817." but 2817 is an unrelated report that does not mention futimes(). report numbers mixed up? author is danieljames. Regression flag questionable: #3178: thread. no mention of a regression. can't be a (recent) regression: the reporter is talking about the win32 implementation("interruptible_wait"). the report is from 2009, the last changes to the relevant code in the trunk are from 2007. #3670: asio. was reported 5 weeks ago, with the following comment: "I am pretty sure that this behaviour has been present since at least boost 1.37.". no mention of a regression. mistake by the reporter? #3392: test (documentation only) report doesn't mention a regression, only that the bug is there "at least since 1.36". 1.36 is the oldest documentation that is online. mistake by reporter? Not a bug: #2107: MPL. someone included an external library that #defines the token "P4", which breaks MPL. boost libraries can't possibly work around the pollution of every other library out there. Under investigation: #3123: Serialization. author looking into it.
On Sun, Dec 27, 2009 at 08:35:39PM +0100, Stefan Strasser wrote:
Am Sunday 27 December 2009 22:16:00 schrieb Vladimir Prus:
I'd just like to point out that we have 28 open tickets marked as "Showstoppers": https://svn.boost.org/trac/boost/report/29
Well, given that half of them is more than 6 months old, they cannot be all true show stoppers. Unfortunately, the severity of the issue typically represents submitter opinion, and not maintainer position about priority of a fix.
I'm sure Boost authors are allowed to change the priority to suit their opinion. :-) The bug triaging that Stefan reported is all good, of course. However, I'd like to suggest that a bug is only "fixed" when the fix is on the release branch. Unfortunately, you can't always judge whether that is the case by the comments on trac tickets: I've seen numerous tickets marked "fixed" when the fix was only on the trunk; I've seen that situation persist for two or more releases; and I've seen erroneous claims that the fix was merged to release when it was not. You really need to check the release code to see whether it is fixed. Regards, -Steve
On Dec 27, 2009, at 1:29 PM, Marshall Clow wrote:
On Dec 27, 2009, at 11:21 AM, Vladimir Prus wrote:
Boosters,
The deadline for "major code changes" for 1.42 is Monday, January 4, 2010. Please try to get all big features merged to release branch by that date, and let the release team know if there are any issues.
The next deadline will be Jan 11, when the release branch will be closed for all changes, except by explicit permission.
-- The Release Managers,
Beman Dawes Daniel James Eric Niebler Rene Rivera Vladimir Prus
I'd just like to point out that we have 28 open tickets marked as "Showstoppers": https://svn.boost.org/trac/boost/report/29 and 14 open tickets marked as "Regressions": https://svn.boost.org/trac/boost/report/30
And I'd also like to draw your attention to an outage beginning Dec 29 of unspecified duration (to replace a network switch and other upgrades). This outage will impact both release and trunk reporting as well as all Sandia testers. Optimistically we should be operational within a day but, given the holidays and other factors, it could be as late as Jan 4th before things come back online. -- Noel
On Dec 27, 2009, at 5:03 PM, Belcourt, Kenneth wrote:
On Dec 27, 2009, at 1:29 PM, Marshall Clow wrote:
On Dec 27, 2009, at 11:21 AM, Vladimir Prus wrote:
Boosters,
The deadline for "major code changes" for 1.42 is Monday, January 4, 2010. Please try to get all big features merged to release branch by that date, and let the release team know if there are any issues.
The next deadline will be Jan 11, when the release branch will be closed for all changes, except by explicit permission.
-- The Release Managers,
Beman Dawes Daniel James Eric Niebler Rene Rivera Vladimir Prus
I'd just like to point out that we have 28 open tickets marked as "Showstoppers": https://svn.boost.org/trac/boost/report/29 and 14 open tickets marked as "Regressions": https://svn.boost.org/trac/boost/report/30
And I'd also like to draw your attention to an outage beginning Dec 29 of unspecified duration (to replace a network switch and other upgrades). This outage will impact both release and trunk reporting as well as all Sandia testers. Optimistically we should be operational within a day but, given the holidays and other factors, it could be as late as Jan 4th before things come back online.
Our switch was replaced and things seem to be working okay. I've restarted both the reporting and the Sandia testers. -- Noel
participants (5)
-
Belcourt, Kenneth -
Marshall Clow -
Stefan Strasser -
Steve M. Robbins -
Vladimir Prus