[Swift-devel] Next Swift release

Mon Dec 6 16:03:12 CST 2010

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. 

To focus on that: 

- call it 0.91 
- based on trunk as of this week (i.e. as soon as we can branch) 
- doc improvements as possible 
- decide on platforms we can test by 12/20 
- test is: language tests already in test suite 
- platform tests to be added, based on "catsn" simple cat loop 

Mike 

----- Original Message -----

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. 

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. 

~sk 

On Mon, Dec 6, 2010 at 1:36 PM, Justin M Wozniak < wozniak at mcs.anl.gov > wrote: 

I think 0.91 makes sense. 

On Mon, 6 Dec 2010, Michael Wilde wrote: 

Im much more focused on the content than on what we call it. 

Im happy to call it anything except 1.0 

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. 

Do people like that better? 

Lets decide this asap so we can make the branch and testable RC. 

- Mike 

----- Original Message ----- 

I would think 0.95 > 0.90 >> 0.10 > 0.9 if i turn off the scientist 
part and turn on the software engineer part of my brain :) 

just like how GNOME is now 2.28 , 2.30 , etc. 

But i do agree this type of numbering confuses scientists who are the 
main users of this software. 

-Allan 

2010/12/6 Ioan Raicu < iraicu at cs.uchicago.edu >: 

How about 0.91, or 0.95? 

On 12/6/2010 2:49 PM, Michael Wilde wrote: 

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 

-- 
Allan M. Espinosa < http://amespinosa.wordpress.com > 
PhD student, Computer Science 
University of Chicago < http://people.cs.uchicago.edu/~aespinosa > 

-- 
Justin M Wozniak 

_______________________________________________ 
Swift-devel mailing list 
Swift-devel at ci.uchicago.edu 
http://mail.ci.uchicago.edu/mailman/listinfo/swift-devel 

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

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.mcs.anl.gov/pipermail/swift-devel/attachments/20101206/8071bd24/attachment.html>