[Swift-devel] Next Swift release

[Michael Wilde]

> here's how i understand it (feel free to correct me):
> 
> 1.0 is the most recent stable branch ready for release--it's probably
> what most people *should* be downloading now if they want to start
> using swift, though our web site still has the 1.5 yr old .9 listed as
> the release download.

Right - and thus almost no users know about or use the 1.0 branch.
I only use trunk, as do all the users that I'm working with.

I believe trunk should be the basis for the 12/20 release.

I do not feel we should release test what's in any of the "stable" branches.

Instead I feel we should "save" the 1.0 branch for when we are ready for doing a 1.0 release: say Jan 31 2011.

I propose we create an 0.10 stable branch as the release candidate for a Dec 20 0.10, and that we use tags to mark release candidates in this branch.

> trunk contains 'bleeding edge' code. for a 12/20
> release we'd want to release something that does not have any new
> features currently being added to it (just bug fixes).

Yes - but just bug fixes over current trunk.  No new features, just bug fixes from tests and any user-reported bugs.  If we can make a release candidate this week, we can have users starting to test thus 0.10 RC in parallel with our testing.

> i'm suggesting
> that we do add *some* new doc since that won't break anything and we
> need to do some cleanup there.

Doc improvements for 0.10 sound good to me, but need to balance the effort required vs testing 0.10.

> but documenation for new features
> should go into the latest trunk doc.

Agreed.  But with "new features" defined as features beyond whats in trunk as of this moment.

> if we want to look at releasing what's in trunk RIGHT NOW, it seems to
> be it should be brached and go into testing mode if we want to get it
> to a point where it's stable enough to release (?)

Yes, I agree, per above. Lets branch it asap.

Does tagging releae candidates on this branch seem the way to go?

> that said, .9 vs branch 1.0 is a pretty significant upgrade...is why i
> suggested .10 was rather confusing as a name for it.

I took the name 0.10 from a suggestion by Ben (long ago) to deal with the fact that we may need more point-releases between 0.9 and 1.0.

I agree that 0.10 is a *bit* confusing, but Im hoping that this release has about a 6-week lifetime from 12/20 to 1/31.

Sound OK?

- Mike

> thoughts?
> 
> ~sk
> 
> 
> On Mon, Dec 6, 2010 at 12:01 PM, Michael Wilde < wilde at mcs.anl.gov >
> wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Im loosing track, but I thought trunk will become branch 0.10?
> 
> 
> I wanted to name it based on what we're trying to say to the user
> community: this next release I feel is still pre-1.0 quality. After
> more doc cleanup and usability cleanup and web polishing, I feel we're
> ready to try to make a broader announcement and call it 1.0. Im
> thinking end of this January for that.
> 
> 
> - Mike
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> feel free, justin. i'm currently editing stuff that i think should go
> into doc for the 12/20 release (e.g. describing features that exist
> but aren't documented, etc.).
> 
> so, branch 1.0 will become release 0.10...seems a bit confusing to
> me...also considering the differences between 0.9 and what we're
> releasing doesn't calling it 1.0 make sense? just a thought...
> 
> ~sk
> 
> 
> On Mon, Dec 6, 2010 at 7:51 AM, Justin M Wozniak < wozniak at mcs.anl.gov
> > wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> Sounds great- I was actually thinking about setting up the
> branch-specific docs later this week, do you already have a start on
> that?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On Mon, 6 Dec 2010, Sarah Kenny wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> so, my expectation for the release, as we've discussed somewhat on the
> list
> already, is to put out swift 1.0 on 12/20 which, as i see it, involves
> primarily editing of the documentation/web content more so than
> anything
> else since all new code (and documentation associated with the new
> code)
> going into trunk is expected to be in the 1.1. release--which
> hopefully we
> can have out in the next few months. i'm also assuming we're sticking
> with
> the plan to allow each release to have its own doc version along with
> the
> code.
> 
> let me know if anyone thinks there are other things that can/should go
> into
> the 12/20 release.
> 
> ~sk
> 
> On Tue, Nov 23, 2010 at 2:10 PM, Michael Wilde < wilde at mcs.anl.gov >
> wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> All,
> 
> Sarah is going to take the lead in producing the next Swift release,
> and
> will propose a release definition and plan. We want to have the
> release done
> by Dec 20.
> 
> - Mike
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Swift-devel mailing list
> Swift-devel at ci.uchicago.edu
> http://mail.ci.uchicago.edu/mailman/listinfo/swift-devel
> 
> 
> 
> --
> Justin M Wozniak
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> --
> Michael Wilde
> Computation Institute, University of Chicago
> Mathematics and Computer Science Division
> Argonne National Laboratory

-- 
Michael Wilde
Computation Institute, University of Chicago
Mathematics and Computer Science Division
Argonne National Laboratory