<html><head><style type='text/css'>p { margin: 0; }</style></head><body><div style='font-family: Times New Roman; font-size: 12pt; color: #000000'>I think we need to move more toward a "release often" strategy, and I think a 12/20 release is a good step in that direction. I want to stay focused on that target.<div><br></div><div>To focus on that:</div><div><br></div><div>- call it 0.91</div><div>- based on trunk as of this week (i.e. as soon as we can branch)</div><div>- doc improvements as possible</div><div>- decide on platforms we can test by 12/20</div><div>- test is: language tests already in test suite</div><div>- platform tests to be added, based on "catsn" simple cat loop</div><div><br></div><div>Mike</div><div><br></div><div><br><hr id="zwchr"><blockquote style="border-left:2px solid rgb(16, 16, 255);margin-left:5px;padding-left:5px;">honestly if we're shooting for the end of january on a 1.0 release i think it would be better to branch trunk now for testing/debugging & doc and focus our effort on that rather than to also have an intermediary 12/20 release. <br>
<br>releasing branch 1.0 as a stable release in the interim *kind of* made sense to me since it truly is stable,ready for release and would help update our web site so we're not specifiying such an old version for download , but if we're talking about branching trunk in its current state i'd lean towards a 1.0 release on 1/31.<br>
<br>~sk <br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Mon, Dec 6, 2010 at 1:36 PM, Justin M Wozniak <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:wozniak@mcs.anl.gov" target="_blank">wozniak@mcs.anl.gov</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); padding-left: 1ex;">
<br>
I think 0.91 makes sense.<div><div></div><div class="h5"><br>
<br>
On Mon, 6 Dec 2010, Michael Wilde wrote:<br>
<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); padding-left: 1ex;">
Im much more focused on the content than on what we call it.<br>
<br>
Im happy to call it anything except 1.0<br>
<br>
Thus 0.91 would be fine by me - to leave some headroom for more point releases if we're not ready for 1.0 at end of Jan.<br>
<br>
Do people like that better?<br>
<br>
Lets decide this asap so we can make the branch and testable RC.<br>
<br>
- Mike<br>
<br>
<br>
----- Original Message -----<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); padding-left: 1ex;">
I would think 0.95 > 0.90 >> 0.10 > 0.9 if i turn off the scientist<br>
part and turn on the software engineer part of my brain :)<br>
<br>
just like how GNOME is now 2.28 , 2.30 , etc.<br>
<br>
But i do agree this type of numbering confuses scientists who are the<br>
main users of this software.<br>
<br>
-Allan<br>
<br>
2010/12/6 Ioan Raicu <<a href="mailto:iraicu@cs.uchicago.edu" target="_blank">iraicu@cs.uchicago.edu</a>>:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); padding-left: 1ex;">
How about 0.91, or 0.95?<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
On 12/6/2010 2:49 PM, Michael Wilde wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); padding-left: 1ex;"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); padding-left: 1ex;">
<br>
here's how i understand it (feel free to correct me):<br>
<br>
1.0 is the most recent stable branch ready for release--it's<br>
probably<br>
what most people *should* be downloading now if they want to start<br>
using swift, though our web site still has the 1.5 yr old .9<br>
listed as<br>
the release download.<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
Right - and thus almost no users know about or use the 1.0 branch.<br>
I only use trunk, as do all the users that I'm working with.<br>
<br>
I believe trunk should be the basis for the 12/20 release.<br>
<br>
I do not feel we should release test what's in any of the "stable"<br>
branches.<br>
<br>
Instead I feel we should "save" the 1.0 branch for when we are<br>
ready for<br>
doing a 1.0 release: say Jan 31 2011.<br>
<br>
I propose we create an 0.10 stable branch as the release candidate<br>
for a<br>
Dec 20 0.10, and that we use tags to mark release candidates in<br>
this branch.<br>
<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); padding-left: 1ex;">
trunk contains 'bleeding edge' code. for a 12/20<br>
release we'd want to release something that does not have any new<br>
features currently being added to it (just bug fixes).<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
Yes - but just bug fixes over current trunk. No new features, just<br>
bug<br>
fixes from tests and any user-reported bugs. If we can make a<br>
release<br>
candidate this week, we can have users starting to test thus 0.10<br>
RC in<br>
parallel with our testing.<br>
<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); padding-left: 1ex;">
i'm suggesting<br>
that we do add *some* new doc since that won't break anything and<br>
we<br>
need to do some cleanup there.<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
Doc improvements for 0.10 sound good to me, but need to balance the<br>
effort<br>
required vs testing 0.10.<br>
<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); padding-left: 1ex;">
but documenation for new features<br>
should go into the latest trunk doc.<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
Agreed. But with "new features" defined as features beyond whats in<br>
trunk<br>
as of this moment.<br>
<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); padding-left: 1ex;">
if we want to look at releasing what's in trunk RIGHT NOW, it<br>
seems to<br>
be it should be brached and go into testing mode if we want to get<br>
it<br>
to a point where it's stable enough to release (?)<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
Yes, I agree, per above. Lets branch it asap.<br>
<br>
Does tagging releae candidates on this branch seem the way to go?<br>
<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); padding-left: 1ex;">
that said, .9 vs branch 1.0 is a pretty significant upgrade...is<br>
why i<br>
suggested .10 was rather confusing as a name for it.<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
I took the name 0.10 from a suggestion by Ben (long ago) to deal<br>
with the<br>
fact that we may need more point-releases between 0.9 and 1.0.<br>
<br>
I agree that 0.10 is a *bit* confusing, but Im hoping that this<br>
release<br>
has about a 6-week lifetime from 12/20 to 1/31.<br>
<br>
Sound OK?<br>
<br>
- Mike<br>
<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); padding-left: 1ex;">
thoughts?<br>
<br>
~sk<br>
<br>
<br>
On Mon, Dec 6, 2010 at 12:01 PM, Michael Wilde< <a href="mailto:wilde@mcs.anl.gov" target="_blank">wilde@mcs.anl.gov</a>><br>
wrote:<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
Im loosing track, but I thought trunk will become branch 0.10?<br>
<br>
<br>
I wanted to name it based on what we're trying to say to the user<br>
community: this next release I feel is still pre-1.0 quality.<br>
After<br>
more doc cleanup and usability cleanup and web polishing, I feel<br>
we're<br>
ready to try to make a broader announcement and call it 1.0. Im<br>
thinking end of this January for that.<br>
<br>
<br>
- Mike<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
feel free, justin. i'm currently editing stuff that i think should<br>
go<br>
into doc for the 12/20 release (e.g. describing features that<br>
exist<br>
but aren't documented, etc.).<br>
<br>
so, branch 1.0 will become release 0.10...seems a bit confusing to<br>
me...also considering the differences between 0.9 and what we're<br>
releasing doesn't calling it 1.0 make sense? just a thought...<br>
<br>
~sk<br>
<br>
<br>
On Mon, Dec 6, 2010 at 7:51 AM, Justin M Wozniak<<br>
<a href="mailto:wozniak@mcs.anl.gov" target="_blank">wozniak@mcs.anl.gov</a><br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); padding-left: 1ex;">
<br>
wrote:<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
<br>
Sounds great- I was actually thinking about setting up the<br>
branch-specific docs later this week, do you already have a start<br>
on<br>
that?<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
On Mon, 6 Dec 2010, Sarah Kenny wrote:<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
so, my expectation for the release, as we've discussed somewhat on<br>
the<br>
list<br>
already, is to put out swift 1.0 on 12/20 which, as i see it,<br>
involves<br>
primarily editing of the documentation/web content more so than<br>
anything<br>
else since all new code (and documentation associated with the new<br>
code)<br>
going into trunk is expected to be in the 1.1. release--which<br>
hopefully we<br>
can have out in the next few months. i'm also assuming we're<br>
sticking<br>
with<br>
the plan to allow each release to have its own doc version along<br>
with<br>
the<br>
code.<br>
<br>
let me know if anyone thinks there are other things that<br>
can/should go<br>
into<br>
the 12/20 release.<br>
<br>
~sk<br>
<br>
On Tue, Nov 23, 2010 at 2:10 PM, Michael Wilde< <a href="mailto:wilde@mcs.anl.gov" target="_blank">wilde@mcs.anl.gov</a>><br>
wrote:<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
All,<br>
<br>
Sarah is going to take the lead in producing the next Swift<br>
release,<br>
and<br>
will propose a release definition and plan. We want to have the<br>
release done<br>
by Dec 20.<br>
<br>
- Mike<br>
<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
Swift-devel mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Swift-devel@ci.uchicago.edu" target="_blank">Swift-devel@ci.uchicago.edu</a><br>
<a href="http://mail.ci.uchicago.edu/mailman/listinfo/swift-devel" target="_blank">http://mail.ci.uchicago.edu/mailman/listinfo/swift-devel</a><br>
<br>
<br>
</blockquote></blockquote></blockquote>
<br>
--<br>
Allan M. Espinosa <<a href="http://amespinosa.wordpress.com" target="_blank">http://amespinosa.wordpress.com</a>><br>
PhD student, Computer Science<br>
University of Chicago <<a href="http://people.cs.uchicago.edu/%7Eaespinosa" target="_blank">http://people.cs.uchicago.edu/~aespinosa</a>><br>
</blockquote>
<br>
<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
-- <br></div></div><font color="#888888">
Justin M Wozniak</font><div><div></div><div class="h5"><br>
_______________________________________________<br>
Swift-devel mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Swift-devel@ci.uchicago.edu" target="_blank">Swift-devel@ci.uchicago.edu</a><br>
<a href="http://mail.ci.uchicago.edu/mailman/listinfo/swift-devel" target="_blank">http://mail.ci.uchicago.edu/mailman/listinfo/swift-devel</a><br>
</div></div></blockquote></div><br>
</blockquote><br><span><br><br>-- <br><span name="x"></span>Michael Wilde<br>Computation Institute, University of Chicago<br>Mathematics and Computer Science Division<br>Argonne National Laboratory<br><span name="x"></span><br></span></div></div></body></html>