New 1.14 RC date?

[Jason Earl]

Ben Finney <ben+bazaar at benfinney.id.au> writes:

> Jason Earl <jearl at notengoamigos.org> writes:
>
>> No one is going to spend effort testing a format that hasn't even
>> landed on bzr.dev.
>
> My understanding is that the discussion is about delaying the release
> of Bazaar 1.14 in order to get the new format into that release. It's
> that which I'm objecting to: I don't think a development format should
> be in a release at all, until it's no longer considered a development
> format.

Landing brisbane-core in bzr.dev would be better than nothing, but it is
still far from ideal for someone trying to migrate a large project to
bzr.  Instead of telling the Emacs developers that they need to get the
latest version of bzr, I'll have to tell them to download a copy of bzr
and then use it to check out a copy of bzr.dev and build and install
that.  That might work for Linux users where building bzr is fairly
straightforward, but I have no idea how to build the Windows version.

On the other hand, at least *I'll* be able to get back to being able to
test the conversion.  So that's something.  Who knows, it's even
possible that the brisbane-core format won't even work as well for Emacs
as the 1.9 format repositories.

> I have no objection to getting new development formats into ‘bzr.dev’;
> that seems, indeed, to be perfectly within the scope of that branch.
> If that's the purpose, though, I don't understand why it is predicated
> on delaying a release.

I suppose I can wait a month before opening up the new repository for
wider testing.  Heck, it might even take me a month to actually get
another usable import.  I'm not going to pretend that I wouldn't be
disappointed with that decision, but the bzr team effectively guaranteed
Emacs would move to bzr when bzr became a Free Software Foundation
project.

I'll try not to be impatient.

Jason