12 Jan
2018
12 Jan
'18
2:36 a.m.
On Thursday 11 of January 2018 20:26:46 Alexandre Couture wrote:
À : trinity-devel(a)lists.pearsoncomputing.net
Objet : [trinity-devel] RE: Time for a new release?
Alexandre Couture wrote:
Hi to all,
thank you for your interest in the release of a new version. You can
believe that we - the team of developers - have the same interest.
I add a few notes:
1) We hope to be able to resolve some of the bugs on list for R14.0.5. See
http://bugs.pearsoncomputing.net/showdependencytree.cgi?id=2696&hide_re…
2) Yes, repository Preliminary Stable Builds directly from its name is not
the final version. And yes, it does not cover all distributions -
especially distributions using RPM.
3) We have not yet announced the availability of additional repository -
Preliminary Testing Builds. This repository contains preliminary packages
for R14.1.0 (git master branch) for newer Debian and Ubuntu releases -
see http://mirror.ppa.trinitydesktop.org/trinity-testing/
Our closest goal is to finish R14.0.5. This is probably well tested
through the Preliminary Stable Builds repository. Although some users use
preliminary R14.1.0, this is still far from the final release.
Note for Emanoil: The complete size of the Preliminary Stable Builds
repository is 44 GiB, the complete size of the Preliminary Testings
Builds repository is 15 GiB. A complete rebuild of Preliminary Stable
Builds repository for all distrubutions and architectures will take about
14 days. Because Preliminary Testing Builds repository include fewer
distributions and fewer architectures, a complete rebuild requires a
fewer days.
Note for Alexandre: Please set up in your mail client some way of
indenting the original quotes, to make us better recognize quotes from
your new text.
Thank you for your patience and support. Please do not forget that your
donations are also important to keep the project alive.
Cheers
--
Slávek
+1 I totally agree. At this point, I think that
it is doing bad to
the image of the project to have no recent release. It's as if things
are fixed, but you won't get the fix until a year or two.
I thought that Slaveks repo on 14.0.5 would mitigate this.
I personally compiled last code from git master (14.1) and can not
complain. I was willing to setup debian repo as code is not that much
in size and I have space on a server somewhere in Germany, but things
are far from ready for it - I have no glue how repo is setup and put on
my todo to read about it - I just found out there 10 ways to setup repo
- what is best? and who would use it?
IMO there are very interesting changes in 14.1 (at least for me) but
also few things did not pass to git master.
In my opinion it would be good to have few flavors (stable/testing/dev)
available so that people can test and report issues. On the other hand
there are many issues but limited resources to work on them.
If only few people are involved how can this be achieved?
For example upgrade of Kgpg to support gnupg2 took my free time for
1month last summer - about 50-60h.
IMO Slavek and the rest of the team are doing great job, because all
relevant changes are pushed to the user as patches, so the necessity of
new release is at the end also debatable.
Do you have cases where patches did not make it to stable?
regards
Hi.
The thing is that Slavek's repo is not the regular release, and not
every distro has access to these .deb packages. So no, the changes are
not pushed to all the users.
Yes I have an example of patches not making their way to stable:
Everything since the last release. I am certainly not talking against
Slavek's repo, but it is not the stable release offered to every users.
It is mostly a rolling-release.
Why not just taking Slavek's code and say tat twice a year, it becomes
the stable release instead? It appears to me to be much easier to
manage than version trees.
-Alexandre