|
Thu 30 Jun 2005 02:41:39 PM UTC, comment #14:
I've tested install process from source code and debian packages.
There may remains glitches but noone that I could catch.
So let's say that 1.0.7 is now released :)
There's still something strange with --gpg-group-keyring option of sv_users, we'll recommend people not to use it unless they want to use gpg checks.
|
Tue 28 Jun 2005 04:13:47 PM UTC, comment #13:
Ok, apart from doing Install/upgrade test, everything seems ok to me right now.
|
Thu 23 Jun 2005 05:30:14 PM UTC, comment #12:
I'm adding some features unplanned but that will not break the timeline. The packaging made obvious the need at some point to have a GPG checking tool integrated in Savane, so I had first to enhance sv_users so it add gpg keys in a convenient. It nows create keyrings per groups.
These keyrings are available at real files, they will be used by a script that will probably be called sv_gpgcheckfile.
And these keyrings are available through Savane. For instance, you can already get an overview of the keys registered in the savane project keyring at :
https://gna.org/project/memberlist-gpgkeys.php?group=savane
and you can download the keyring, which one you can easily import with gpg.
|
Thu 23 Jun 2005 03:03:40 PM UTC, comment #11:
Side note: these packages does not contains what is necessary to make the upgrade from 1.0.6.
I think I'll add a package savane-upgrade-1.0.6to1.0.7 that will contains the necessary stuff, that will be recommended from people doing the upgrade.
|
Wed 22 Jun 2005 10:31:57 PM UTC, comment #10:
If you want to test the debian packages, check http://download.gna.org/savane/debian/
|
Wed 22 Jun 2005 10:31:27 PM UTC, comment #9:
Ok so in fact there will be (basic) debian package.
So far, no issue found with utf-8 changes. So the next release is likely to happen, as planned before, next week.
Before the release, I'd like to do one more test of the install process from the source and one from the debian package (if someone else what doing, maybe it would be an opportunity to catch things that my eyes missed already).
|
Tue 21 Jun 2005 07:25:26 AM UTC, comment #8:
I intend to build the packages next week. One week of users comments on Gna should be enough (everything seems to work already).
I'd like to redo an upgrade test (it would be best if it was done by someone that havent made such test). In fact, such test must be done, since I updated the scripts during Gna!'s upgrade.
|
Mon 20 Jun 2005 02:54:01 PM UTC, comment #7:
bug #2192 and bug #2182 cancelled for this release (I dont think one of us will handle them this week)
|
Mon 11 Apr 2005 01:46:54 PM UTC, comment #6:
1.0.x will continue indefinitely unless progress made are more a revolution than just an evolution. Well, if a release had been made before the 1.0.0, the 1.0.0 would probably have been an 1.2.0 because this release was this kind of revolution (trackers code mixed into one tracker etc..)
|
Sat 09 Apr 2005 05:37:38 PM UTC, comment #5:
Ok, I have no problem with this decision. So we'll just stick with the version 1.0.7.
Just out of curiosity, because Savane has undergone quite a few changes since 1.0.0, what would you consider a valid reason to increase the minor version number (e.g. 1.1.0 or maybe 1.2.0)? Or is Savane going to get "bugfixes" only, so the 1.0.* series will continue indefinitely?
|
Fri 08 Apr 2005 07:09:55 AM UTC, comment #4:
I have a problem with 1.1.x/1.3.x/... which always looks unstable due to the old linux policy.
But frankly, utf8 is a non-noticeable change for most current users of Savane (which have no issue with iso8859-1). So 1.2.0 would hardly make sense.
So I think 1.0.7 is okay. Anyway, people running production server should always take care when doing upgrade and the upgrade scripts should not be risky at all.
|
Fri 08 Apr 2005 07:04:38 AM UTC, comment #3:
I think you are right.
|
Thu 07 Apr 2005 05:21:07 PM UTC, comment #2:
Hi,
I was thinking about the transition to UTF-8 and the critical operations involved in this update.
To make it really clear to admins that they should exercise special care, I suggest to release it as 1.1.0 instead of 1.0.7.
What do you think?
|
Thu 31 Mar 2005 07:33:39 AM UTC, comment #1:
Hello,
There are a few changes (query forms) that we would probably want to include in this release, as there's no ETA for a 1.0.8 release.
I'll attach as deps. If we do not manage to deal with them while everything gettext/utf8 related is done, they will not block the release.
|
Thu 24 Mar 2005 10:27:54 AM UTC, original submission:
As discussed in bug #1981, the release 1.0.7 should shortly follow 1.0.6.
|
Related Recipes:
Savane - Tasks: task #1481, Release 1.0.7