1.11 release process (was: [PULL] -next branch for 1.11)

[Jeremy Huddleston]

On Feb 28, 2011, at 22:53, Keith Packard wrote:
>> 2) I think the early rcs might not have been as well tested because
>> they relied on xextproto and randrproto versions that were not
>> released.  Perhaps we should ensure that we release rc protos along
>> with rc servers where appropriate.
> 
> Do you want to keep X server code from being merged until a suitable
> proto RC has been released? Or is it sufficient to have code in the
> proto repo that has been reviewed?

I think that locked-step changes should be done as simultaneously as possible.  We should try not to merge proto updates that cause the server to stop building (as was the case with randr for a while) until both sets are reviewed and can be pushed together.  The same goes for tagged releases.  I think we should've pushed rc tags of extproto and randrproto to coincide with the server rcs. This would allow someone to build the rc server entirely from tarballs which might allow for more exposure.

> 
>> Sure.  +1 for dstone. ;)
> 
> He did volunteer to merge the proto repositories together quite a while
> ago...
> 
> -- 
> keith.packard at intel.com