<div class="gmail_quote">On Mon, Apr 27, 2009 at 12:50 PM, Troy A. Griffitts <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:scribe@crosswire.org">scribe@crosswire.org</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
Jonathan Marsden wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
Troy A. Griffitts wrote:<br>
Good :)<br>
<br>
Is there is list of all known release-critical bugs and TODO items<br>
somewhere?<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
No, the bugtracker is clean now for critical 1.6.x changes, as far as I know (right?). We're only fixing feedback we get on the RCs now.<br>
<br>
The only outstanding issue of which I know is the link bug DM is working on with osis2mod, but I'm about to tell him that he probably needs to check the ordinal count of his returned ListKey in a different manner in our osis2mod utility, so this probably won't be an API change. I think we're just waiting now to bundle locales and v11n systems. No code changes unless someone speaks up about something I've overlooked again.<br>
</blockquote><div>At the moment, current SVN:<br>1) won't compile with SWIG (versekey changes - I have a patch for these)<br>2) Breaks disastrously with SWIG once compiled - segfaulting in lots of places... (e.g. this code dies in localemgr destructor:<br>
import Sword<br>Sword.VerseKey()<br>)<br><br>I'm trying to track the second one down, but it seems to only occur in the bindings...<br><br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
There have now been several commits since 1.6.0RC2... (I'd<br>
say exactly now many, but it wasn't tagged... :)<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
scribe@scribe-laptop:~/src/sword-1.6.0RC2$ svn log -r {`ls -l configure|cut -f6 -d' '`}:HEAD <a href="http://crosswire.org/svn/sword/trunk" target="_blank">http://crosswire.org/svn/sword/trunk</a><br>
<br>
:)<br>
<br>
<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
is it perhaps time for an RC3 and a freeze on all non-essential changes until we can get a<br>
final 1.6 "out the door"??<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
Yeah, I'd say so. I'm about to head out to evening service at Church since I slept in this morning :) and when I get back, if no one has complained, we can bundle an RC3 and hopefully go out the door soon. I don't consider locale or v11n data changes warrant for a new RC, so if we only get those changes over the next couple days, let's shoot to release a final on Tuesday evening PST.<br>
<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
(Creating a branch for the 1.6.0 release, so that new commits intended<br>
for 1.6.1 could continue on svn head, would also work well, but that<br>
doesn't seem to be the "SWORD way" of doing things).<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
:) Again, this release has undergone a little more testing than usual as we're hoping to 'change our ways' with this BRANCH and force ourselves to not do API changes in 1.6.x. <br></blockquote><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
<br>
<br>
My plan is to continue to work on 1.6.x for a while (months), improving speed, filters, and fixing any bugs, and actually USE 1.6.x in some of my own apps for a while before starting any API-changing additional features which will require a branch of HEAD to 1.6.x, and 1.7.x to continue in HEAD at that point. I don't want to have to branch until we necessarily start 1.7.x API-breaking changes; otherwise we have to keep merging 1.6.x changes into HEAD, which would make the lines identical till we start 1.7.x work anyway. Though we will definitely TAG 1.6.0 (which is the same as a branch anyway in svn-- if we need to change our minds for some odd reason).<br>
</blockquote><div>How long does that delay mapping between versifications? I think this is relatively important to have - especially if modules start being re-released with av11n - which I would strongly discourage at the moment, seeing as no frontend yet supports them. <br>
<br clear="all">God Bless,<br>Ben<br>-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------<br>Multitudes, multitudes,<br> in the valley of decision!<br>For the day of the LORD is near<br>
in the valley of decision.<br><br>Giôên 3:14 (ESV)<br></div></div>