Re: What is holding up 2.20 release?

[David Kastrup]

Carl Sorensen <address@hidden> writes:

> On 11/16/19, 1:52 PM, "David Kastrup" <address@hidden> wrote:
>
>     Carl Sorensen <address@hidden> writes:
>     
>     > Dear Team,
>     >
>     > It seems to me like we are pretty much in shape such that we should
>     > release 2.20.  I'd be fine if we called 2.19.83-1 the 2.20 release,
>     > even if there are some critical regressions.  2.19.83 is SO much
>     > better than 2.18.2.
>     >
>     > IIUC, the only thing 2.20 is waiting on is for David K. to cherry-pick
>     > some patches.  Is that correct?
>     
>     And putting out a new prerelease to be sure that those are ok, and
>     waiting for the translators to catch up with cherry-picked patches
>     containing stuff to be translated.
>     
>     But the current roadblock is David K. cherry-picking some patches.  
>
> Is the reason for cherry-picking such a big list of patches to avoid
> some regressions?

THIS IS NOT A LIST FOR CHERRY-PICKING!!!!  It is a unculled list of
potential candidates that _may_ need or want to be cherry-picked, in
case a particular candidate is

either
a) fixing a regression
b) fixing a problem that will foreseeably cause trouble with near-future
or our current build systems
c) fixing a problem or providing a feature that will foreseeably cause
frequent tension between 2.20 and 2.21 users if not cherry-picked
d) a definite improvement that does not show potential for causing new
regressions
e) a documentation fix/change matching 2.20 behavior

and/or/maybe
a) cherry-picks reasonably painlessly
b) does not cause significant followup tasks to be also scheduled

> Or are these patches that were created after we put out the last
> pre-release?

Minus those I already cherry-picked

> Would you like me to try doing the cherry-picking for you?

If anybody tries indiscriminately picking that list, I am going to be
pissed.  The majority of those patches likely has no place in 2.20.

-- 
David Kastrup