help / color / mirror / code / Atom feed
From: "Daniel Shahaf" <d.s@daniel.shahaf.name>
To: zsh-workers@zsh.org
Subject: Re: We should get 5.9** out soon
Date: Thu, 31 Mar 2022 23:31:36 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <17292100-61f9-4183-8d04-6f8443f3c2f7@www.fastmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <526109583.788642.1648724722076@mail2.virginmedia.com>

Peter Stephenson wrote on Thu, 31 Mar 2022 11:05 +00:00:
>> On 31 March 2022 at 11:47 Daniel Shahaf <d.s@daniel.shahaf.name> wrote:
>> dana wrote on Thu, 31 Mar 2022 00:34 +00:00:
>> > On Wed 30 Mar 2022, at 11:51, Bart Schaefer wrote:
>> >> Lots of accumulated fixes, but probably the most important is to
>> >> un-break line-buffered input (workers/49792), since that problem was
>> >> introduced by the 5.8.1 security release.
>> I don't think the regression in 5.8.1 is a reason to release a 5.9; it's
>> only a reason to release a 5.8.2.  That could have a shorter pre-release
>> testing period ("soak"), and wouldn't force people to choose between the
>> regression in 5.8.1 and any as-yet-undiscovered regressions 5.9 might
>> feature (which is more likely than usual because of how large the
>> 5.8→5.9 diff is).
> The logic is entirely reasonable, but in practice I think stopgap fixes
> are likely just to put things off further.  I think it's worth getting
> out 5.9(?) and seeing if there's still a market for backporting non-security
> fixes to 5.8.2 --- there may not be.  (This may be the sort of thinking
> Bart had in mind.)

Sure, I wouldn't mind that.  I just figured it wouldn't be desirable to
delay release of the regression fix until 5.9's soak is over.  (We could
release 5.8.2 next week if we wanted to, but a 5.9 that's >2 years after
5.8 will likely want to be tested for longer than that.)

> We've never required an incompatible change to bump the major number before
> (there's often been one anyway), but given there's no single determiner it's
> something you might well take into account.

(Nothing to add to this topic at the moment.)



  reply	other threads:[~2022-03-31 23:32 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2022-03-30 16:51 Bart Schaefer
2022-03-31  0:34 ` dana
2022-03-31  0:48   ` Bart Schaefer
2022-03-31 10:23   ` Peter Stephenson
2022-03-31 10:47   ` Daniel Shahaf
2022-03-31 10:54     ` Axel Beckert
2022-03-31 11:05     ` Peter Stephenson
2022-03-31 23:31       ` Daniel Shahaf [this message]
2022-04-02 22:42         ` dana
2022-04-03 16:07           ` Peter Stephenson
2022-04-03 16:39           ` Bart Schaefer
2022-04-03 17:04           ` Branching (was Re: We should get 5.9** out soon) Bart Schaefer
2022-04-03 19:34             ` dana

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=17292100-61f9-4183-8d04-6f8443f3c2f7@www.fastmail.com \
    --to=d.s@daniel.shahaf.name \
    --cc=zsh-workers@zsh.org \


* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
Code repositories for project(s) associated with this public inbox


This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).