What's still needed to build the Windows 2.0.1 installers?

[John Arbash Meinel]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1


...

>> Note that I do *not* have 2.1.0b1 built yet. But the expected changes are:
>>   bzr		2.0.0 => 2.1.0b1
>>   bzrtools 	2.0.0 => 2.1.0b1
>>   qbzr 		0.14.2 => 0.15
>>   bzr-svn 	1.0.0 => something compatible with 2.1.0b1
>>   subvertpy 	0.6.9 => 0.7.? (0.7.0 fails to build)
>>   tortoisebzr 	no change (0.3.0, 0.3.1 needs updated bzr)
>>   bzr-explorer 	=> 0.8.3
>>   bzr-rewrite 	no change (0.5.4)
>>
>> The 2 main blockers are:
>>   1) Needing a newer bzr-svn and subvertpy
>>   2) Out of steam for fighting with issues (thus not even attempting
>>      until (1) is solved.)
> 
> So I really think we need to change our process in a few ways to restore
> some sort of Release Manager sanity here:
> 
> 1. patches which change the minimum API in bzrlib need to be announced
>    WHEN THEY LAND so plugin developers have time to respond
> 
> 2. Plugin developers should become repsonsible for tweaking the version
>    number released in the Windows installer.
> 
> Would that help, assuming we have 2 branches for bzr-windows-installers,
> one for 2.0.x and another for 2.1.0betaX?
> 
> Ian C.
> 

Well, we should only have this primary struggle on the first release.
Namely, api_minimum_version is now 2.1.0, and we won't have 2.1.1 or
2.2.* for another 6 months or so.

It was just about as painful that 4 plugins wanted to release updated
versions for 2.0.1. Now, some things should settle down. Like Jelmer did
the right think and updated bzr-windows-installer for subvertpy 0.7.0,
however that shouldn't have gone into the 2.0.1 release, and it turned
out that it broke the build anyway. (Changed a search path, etc.)

What would probably do the best is to get the installers being built on
Babune, so that we might have a bit more heads up when the plugins start
failing.

I think bzrtools is only locked to 'micro', so 2.0.2 won't require a
2.0.2 bzrtools, though it may have one if there are bugfixes. I believe
Aaron stated that he isn't going to be focusing as much on 2.1.0
releases of bzrtools, since it is in 'beta' status, and thus drift and
breakage is more acceptable.

So I'm crossing my fingers that 2.0.2 and 2.1.0b2 will go much smoother
than this release did.

John
=:->
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (Cygwin)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/

iEYEARECAAYFAkreIBcACgkQJdeBCYSNAAMomQCcCpeNcNB5btbgM+P7Ia/qgSXT
xWQAn1INAzDwNp/nHuAx58hDEsw9Dd3X
=eK1w
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----