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 10:47:52 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1b9eb6a0-f9bb-42c2-9ff8-8c9a61e6e4ce@www.fastmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <2edcc9b8-6877-40d3-b2c1-158fafeed806@www.fastmail.com>

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).

We _should_ release 5.9 — it's been way too long since 5.8 — but not
because of that regression.

> I'm ready whenever.
> @Daniel, did you want to see us sort out the VCS_Info escaping stuff we
> pushed back from 5.8.1? I'm not in a position to steer that myself; if
> you're not either we can push it back again.

Do I want to progress the open issue, consense upon it, and resolve it?
Yes.  Do I think it's a release blocker?  No, because it's neither
a regression nor severe enough.

> Is there anything else that anybody would like to see go in (besides
> the dedication we discussed off-list)? Any timing considerations?

Over here, I haven't yet gotten around to reviewing the threads earlier
this year where Bart mentioned a few open issues.  I'd like to do so,
but that shouldn't block the release either.

> On Wed 30 Mar 2022, at 11:51, Bart Schaefer wrote:
>> ** Or 6.0 or whatever we're calling it.
> Does anyone have any strong feelings about 5.9 vs 6.0? I don't.

I'd prefer 5.9 because we haven't made a backwards-incompatible change.

> (Again i've only been loosely paying attention lately, sorry if i've
> missed anything)

So, I'd recommend to first release a 5.8.2 that's 5.8.1 + select patches
(including the regression fix) and then to start the 5.9 release train.
If needed, I could try to find time to RM 5.8.2, but honestly I'm
stretched thin as it is.


(excuse brevity)

  parent reply	other threads:[~2022-03-31 10:49 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 [this message]
2022-03-31 10:54     ` Axel Beckert
2022-03-31 11:05     ` Peter Stephenson
2022-03-31 23:31       ` Daniel Shahaf
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=1b9eb6a0-f9bb-42c2-9ff8-8c9a61e6e4ce@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).