[gst-devel] summit conclusions + plans

[Maciej Katafiasz]

Dnia 20-02-2005, nie o godzinie 19:19 +0100, Thomas Vander Stichele
napisał:
> Hi gang,
> 
> here's a quick recap of some of the things we've discussed and decided
> on during this summit.

[snip]

Very nice summary. Here are my questions, in no particular order:

- What is our target with 1.0? Do we aim for 1.x being stable up to 2.0,
or is 1.2 next ABI/API breaking release? If the former, it'd be probably
good to try and think of possible places where breakage would be most
likely to happen and design with that in mind (yes, I know it's hard to
think more than 2 releases ahead)

- What about 0.8 releases? Are we going to totally halt them, slow them
down, or try to keep up with normal schedule? And does it make sense to
keep someone maintaining 0.8, or is it better to spend maximum resources
on 0.9?

- If we are going to have multiple dev branches at once, CVS sounds
insane. Could we agree upon one SCM system (which totally needs to have
star-merge functionality) and designate a master repo using that SCM?
That would be place to sync to, not necessarily the only allowed SCM,
although I have no idea what are the possibilities of syncing between
non-CVS systems.

- before we go for branching 0.9, it'd be nice to allocate 2-3h to gang
review all pending patches. We have 30 unreviewed, probably some
reviewed but not commited that should be dealt with before. Total
uncommited, not rejected patches is 33 right now:

http://bugzilla.gnome.org/buglist.cgi?short_desc_type=allwordssubstr&short_desc=&product=GStreamer&long_desc_type=allwordssubstr&long_desc=&status_whiteboard_type=allwordssubstr&status_whiteboard=&keywords_type=anywords&keywords=&bug_status=UNCONFIRMED&bug_status=NEW&bug_status=ASSIGNED&bug_status=REOPENED&emailtype1=substring&email1=&emailtype2=substring&email2=&bugidtype=include&bug_id=&changedin=&chfieldfrom=&chfieldto=Now&chfieldvalue=&cmdtype=doit&newqueryname=&order=Reuse+same+sort+as+last+time&field0-0-0=attachstatusdefs.name&type0-0-0=notequals&value0-0-0=committed&field0-1-0=attachstatusdefs.name&type0-1-0=notequals&value0-1-0=rejected&field0-2-0=attachments.ispatch&type0-2-0=equals&value0-2-0=1

That's about it for now.

Cheers,
Maciej

-- 
Maciej Katafiasz <ml at mathrick.org>