Front page | perl.perl5.porters |
Postings from June 2009
Re: Perl 5.10.1
From: David Golden
June 21, 2009 06:25
Re: Perl 5.10.1
Message ID: email@example.com
On Sun, Jun 21, 2009 at 9:08 AM, Dave Mitchell<firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> So all in all, I expect that the release of 5.10.1 is now a short number
> of weeks away.
> I really can't see any point in releasing "5.10.0 + one bug fix" at this
While in general, I support a shorter release cycle for bug-fixes as I
mentioned in my post, I have to agree with Dave M. here.
Assuming that we really are a matter of weeks away, pushing a micro
release now will ultimately benefit few users, while it creates extra
work for OS packagers who will need to roll two sets of new perl
packages in short order.
I know I'm doing my part on the dual-life module side on M::B to get
it ready for release. I released M::B 0.33_02 and it went into blead.
I've finished the regression test of 0.33 to 0.33_02 on 3000+ modules
on CPAN with only 2 negative outcomes (and those from flaky modules
that might have spurious web failures). I'm about ready to roll
0.33_03, which has 15+ bugs closed in the M::B RT queue in the last
week, including all bugs marked "important" or above.
It sounds like Dave's big blockers are remaining dual-life modules --
Dave, run the tool again and name and shame people -- and bug list
So if people want to see 5.10.1 out the door, now's the time to go
look at the list, pick a bug, and opine on whether it needs to be
fixed or can sit and wait.
And if we *can* agree that a micro-release process makes sense going
forward, then the urgency to close out truly minor bugs in that list
should go down.