[ANN] bzr 2.4.0 has gone gold

[vila]

>>>>> Gordon Tyler <gordon at doxxx.net> writes:

    > On 8/13/2011 3:45 PM, vila wrote:
    >> Let's build installers and packages to make 2.4.0 an even better bzr 
    >> than ever.
    >> 
    >> All plugin authors should now have official releases for inclusion.

    > Nope. Jelmer tells me bzr-svn won't have an official release for a few
    > days. qbzr recently released 0.21.1 for 2.4 but the upcoming 0.21.2
    > would be preferred since it has a bugfix for the Merge tab in qconfig.
    > bzr-loom and bzr-pipeline have not made official releases since before
    > the 2.4 series started even though they have relatively recent commits.

    > And that's ignoring the various other plugins that have never had an
    > official release (either tagged in their repo or a downloadable
    > tarball), for which I usually just package whatever happens to be the
    > tip at the time.

    > I'm going to put off packaging the Mac OS X installer until at least
    > bzr-svn and qbzr are released since I consider those major plugins.

I'd rather have packages and installers based on specific revids than
delay them.

Our users care less than us about having stable branches for plugins and
as long as we document which revisions are used (which we do already for
all the package/installers I'm aware of) that's fine.

Using dedicated branches is aimed at facilitating plugin author lifes
but if they prefer a different workflow, that's fine too.

Now, we could try to reach each plugin author and tell him which
revision has been used so that it's at least tagged there if only for
our own needs.

    >> It will also be nice if you can reply to this mail to list which 
    >> versions of which plugins you packaged.

    > Currently, although this may be subject to change over the next
    > few days:

<snip/>

Thanks,

        Vincent