[Swift-devel] swift versions

[Sarah Kenny]

i'm getting the emails (coming thru to swift-devel from bugzilla)...is
anyone else getting them?

~sk

On Thu, Oct 7, 2010 at 5:03 PM, Michael Wilde <wilde at mcs.anl.gov> wrote:

> Hi Sarah,
>
> Its great that you are cleaning out bugzilla! I'm eager to get it back in
> general use as our team-wide "to do" tracker. Or at least to try that method
> and see if it works well for us.
>
> I have not been seeing any emails from bugzilla, though. Can you see how to
> configure it so that I get emails on all changes? (same for anyone else on
> the team who wants to see "everything" - I suspect Justin and Mihael might
> as well).
>
> Thanks!
>
> Mike
>
>
>
>
>
> ----- "Sarah Kenny" <skenny at uchicago.edu> wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, Oct 7, 2010 at 1:08 PM, Mihael Hategan <hategan at mcs.anl.gov>wrote:
> >
>>
>> Right. I think 1.0/4.1.7 should go out soon.
>
>
> > ok, so i guess we should decide what 'soon' means ;) i am currently going
> thru the old bugs in bugzilla (at least trying to close out things that have
> been already fixed or are no-longer applicable, etc), but perhaps it would
> be good to determine if there are bigger issues outside of that that still
> need to be dealt with before we can put what we've got into a stable release
> and determine a time-frame...anything come to mind?
> >
> > as far as documentation...does it make sense for each branch to have a
> full copy of /ci/www/projects/swift under it which can then be merged with
> the main/live copy whenever the code is merged? admittedly, i know nothing
> about docbook, but from the standpoint of updating and merging this seems to
> make sense to me (though feel free to suggest another way :)
> >
> > ~sk
> >
> >
>
>> And then 1.1/4.1.8 next. 6
>> > months was just a guess at how much it will take us to get to 1.1 and is
>> > by no means what I think should happen. But my suspicion is that it will
>> > take on the order of months.
>> >
>>
>> > On Thu, 2010-10-07 at 12:51 -0500, Justin M Wozniak wrote:
>> > > Yeah, I would like to get the branches (and branched manuals) formed
>> on
>> > > the short term.
>> > >
>> > > On Thu, 7 Oct 2010, Sarah Kenny wrote:
>> > >
>> > > > does the 6 month release time that mihael alluded to seem doable?
>> that is,
>> > > > do you think we should shoot for the next release being around the
>> 1st week
>> > > > of april 2011?...during which time we would phase out clustering
>> (provided
>> > > > we don't get anyone on the user list saying they need it...which i
>> sincerely
>> > > > doubt).
>> > > >
>> > > > ~sk
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > On Thu, Oct 7, 2010 at 11:04 AM, Justin M Wozniak <
>> wozniak at mcs.anl.gov>wrote:
>> > > >
>> > > >> On Tue, 5 Oct 2010, Mihael Hategan wrote:
>> > > >>
>> > > >>  On Tue, 2010-10-05 at 19:40 -0500, Sarah Kenny wrote:
>> > > >>>
>> > > >>>> ok, just want to make sure i fully understand the state of the
>> code:
>> > > >>>>
>> > > >>>> these are the most current/stable versions of swift & cog (that
>> which
>> > > >>>> we tell users to download):
>> > > >>>>
>> > > >>>> swift: branch/1.0
>> > > >>>> (https://trac.ci.uchicago.edu/swift/browser/branches/1.0)
>> > > >>>> cog: branches/4.1.7
>> > > >>>> (http://cogkit.svn.sourceforge.net/viewvc/cogkit/branches/4.1.7/
>> )
>> > > >>>>
>> > > >>>> these are the development (less stable) versions of the code that
>> we
>> > > >>>> should be committing changes to:
>> > > >>>>
>> > > >>>> swift: trunk/ (https://trac.ci.uchicago.edu/swift/browser/trunk)
>> > > >>>> cog: trunk/current
>> > > >>>> (http://cogkit.svn.sourceforge.net/viewvc/cogkit/trunk/current/)
>> > > >>>>
>> > > >>>> assuming that's correct...
>> > > >>>>
>> > > >>>> for swift, what are the other/multiple directories under
>> branches/
>> > > >>>> that do not appear to be releases or release candidates?
>> > > >>>> is the intent, upon the next swift release (whenever that may be)
>> to
>> > > >>>> update swift branch/1.0 with the changes that have been committed
>> to
>> > > >>>> trunk/ ?
>> > > >>>>
>> > > >>>
>> > > >>> Right. There are two reasons for doing branches:
>> > > >>> 1. if some work divergent from trunk is needed
>> > > >>> 2. to stabilize for a release
>> > > >>>
>> > > >>> For (1), if thinks work out OK, you eventually merge them back
>> into
>> > > >>> trunk.
>> > > >>>
>> > > >>> (2)s also get merged back into trunk in one way or another, since
>> they
>> > > >>> may contain bug fixes.
>> > > >>>
>> > > >>> _______________________________________________
>> > > >>> Swift-devel mailing list
>> > > >>> Swift-devel at ci.uchicago.edu
>> > > >>> http://mail.ci.uchicago.edu/mailman/listinfo/swift-devel
>> > > >>>
>> > > >>
>> > > >> So for Swift 1.1, can we have a CoG 4.1.8?
>> > > >>
>> > > >> --
>> > > >> 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/20101007/a349373a/attachment.html>