Plans for 5.20

[Dominic Hargreaves]

On Sat, May 17, 2014 at 09:57:19AM +0300, Niko Tyni wrote:
> On Wed, May 14, 2014 at 12:19:55AM +0100, Dominic Hargreaves wrote:
> > On Sun, May 11, 2014 at 11:40:51AM +0300, Niko Tyni wrote:
> > 
> > > I've pushed preliminary 5.19.11 packaging to our Alioth repository
> > > as ntyni/debian-5.19. I haven't tagged it as those are pretty much
> > > irrevocable, but f8ec2d0ebcf73f2bf19ccc15167bb70c18a56228 is the commit
> > > I pushed. The last two commits are the multiarch related ones.
> > 
> > Thanks for working on ntyni/debian-5.19 - that's a lot of legwork taken
> > care of!
> > 
> > I'm guessing we'll want to loosely base our 5.20 branch on
> > ntyni/debian-5.19 (plenty of scope for cherry-picking I see) rather
> > than actually use that as a git ancestor, to keep history clean?
> > How painful was git dpm rebase-patched this time?
> 
> It wasn't *really* bad, but enough so that I wouldn't want to do it
> again. In particular, ExtUtils::MakeMaker or something thereabouts had
> started buffering its output into a variable and only printing it out
> later, which caused quite a few conflicts.
> 
> OTOH if you'd like to try it for 5.20.0, that could be used to cross-check
> my conflict resolutions, which would probably be useful to catch any bugs
> I've introduced.
> 
>  git diff debian/5.19 debian/5.20 -- debian/patches
> 
> or something like that.
> 
> Anyway, I don't think it would be too unclean to keep 5.19.11 in the
> git history.

Okay, it sounds like redoing it would be makework; let's stick with
your branch as a base. I'll happily review the patches at some point.

> I see 5.20.0-RC1 was released last night.

Indeed. I am unsure when I'll get to look at this though; the free time
I was hoping to have hasn't really materialised yet.

Dominic.