Releasing stable, dev, and others

[John Arbash Meinel]

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

On 2013-12-10 1:16, Curtis Hovey-Canonical wrote:
> Gentlemen.
> 
> Juju-core 1.16.5 has one bug preventing us from doing a release.
> CI has blessed  lp:juju-core/1.16 r1998. Do we want to defer the 
> "destroy-machine --force" bug? 
> https://launchpad.net/juju-core/+milestone/1.16.5

It has already been done. It was one of the patches that got "put on
the side" when we changed what 1.16.4 was, and when I landed it back
onto trunk I forgot to update the bug status.

AFAIK, 1.16.5 is ready for release at any point we decide to go for it.


> 
> Is there any reason not to backport the "http close=True" fix to 
> stable? Surely this bug affects several customers. 
> https://bugs.launchpad.net/juju-core/+bug/1239558 I have verified
> we can increment the dependent libs. The patch applies (with some
> corrections to dependencies.tsv).
> 
> Juju-core 1.17.0 still has regressions. HP is very broken, AWS has 
> intermittent bootstrap issues. Is it possible to focus effort on
> these bugs to get a blessed revision? We have a good revision from
> Nov 4 (2071) but I don't think devs want to release a version that
> old. https://launchpad.net/juju-core/+milestone/1.17.0

It touches a fair amount of code, because all our stuff stops using
Keep Alive, but I think it is a reasonable candidate. (When you see
bugs that talk about Unexpected EOF, that tends to be this bug.)

> 
> These projects have never been released. I want to mark the bugs
> as Fix Released since users must be using branches to work with the
> code. I can create release tarballs if we think formal releases are
> demanded by users. 
> https://bugs.launchpad.net/goyaml/+bugs?search=Search&field.status=Fix+Committed
>
> 
https://bugs.launchpad.net/gomaasapi/+bugs?search=Search&field.status=Fix+Committed
> https://bugs.launchpad.net/goose/+bugs?search=Search&field.status=Fix+Committed

I'd
> 
like to see us start making official releases of our dependencies,
but that doesn't have to hinge on this. I'm fine just marking them Fix
Released.

> 
> GWACL has a release, I think we want to cut another release to
> make it's bugs Fix Released. Is anyone using the GWACL release? I
> suspect the branch is used like most go projects. 
> https://bugs.launchpad.net/gwacl/+bugs?search=Search&field.status=Fix+Committed
>
> 
I would agree.

John
=:->
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.13 (Cygwin)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/

iEYEARECAAYFAlKmmOgACgkQJdeBCYSNAAMeVQCeKCNnQXL7dOeO3CDUwqxMwMop
AI4AoIz1i7PQ8+QpLzv3IN2+Wow8FmCP
=9PiJ
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----