Re: [ros-dev] Next release

[Alex Ionescu]

Ged Murphy wrote:

>   Alex Ionescu wrote:
>
> >   Murphy, Ged (Bolton) wrote:
> >
> > >   We're at the 2 month period since our last
> > > release. Is it not time 
> > >  to branch now and chase some more publicity
> > >
> > >  If Alex meets his 1st December deadline for User-Mode networking, I 
> > >  propose a 0.2.9 branch then.
> > >
> > >  Any thoughts?
> > >
> > >  
> >  Hi Ged,
> >
> >  I told you on IRC, and you seemed to ignore what I was telling 
> >  you...so I'll say it publically. 
>
>  I haven't 'ignored' what you were telling me. I've never even spoken 
>  to you about this in IRC. In fact I only started thinking it was time 
>  for a release this morning. If you've spoken to me about something 
>  related this this, I've either forgotten or missed what you said. I 
>  generally don't purposely ignore people.
>
> >   Just because I finish the CODE on December 1st
> > doesn't mean it's 
> >  ready to be used.  
>
>  I didn't say that it would be ready to use. Your blog says "Finish 
>  User-Mode Networking for ReactOS. Deadline: Dec 1st." which I assumed 
>  meant 'finish'.  I was simply looking for a branch date, and that 
>  seemed an ideal time. 
Are you delibaretely skipping:

"Commit and test the User-Mode Networking branch, with appropriate 
afd.sys changes. Deadline: Dec 14th."?

>  
> >   I've said it numerous times (and even posted
> > on my blog) that it will 
> >  probably only be usable in HEAD after around December 14th. And after 
> >  that I still have kernel-mode fixes planned for afd.sys, which go 
> >  well beyond into January. If you branch 0.2.9 now, it won't be a 
> >  networking release (again), and will offer little to the users. 
>
>  I know 0.2.9 isn't going to be the networking release. I mentioned it 
>  could be a networking preview release as I assumed your sockets lib 
>  might be in some way usable, due to the 'finish' you used to describe 
>  what was happening on 1st Dec. Now I know it won't be doesn't change 
>  the fact that I think we need to branch. 1st Dec still sounds good to 
>  me if everyone is in agreement. 
I agree.

>   I agree with Ge on the branch often way of doing
> things, preferably 
>  every 2 months. 
I agree too. Just don't:
1) Make it depend on me
2) Call it a networking preview. It's not.

>  
>  Ged.