[Uim] Towards 1.0

[TOKUNAGA Hiroyuki]

On Tue, 09 Aug 2005 07:32:54 +0900
YamaKen <yamaken at bp.iij4u.or.jp> wrote:

> > > We already have the two major unstabilizing factors, SigScheme
> > > stability and R5RS compliance of scm/*.scm. So I simply don't
> > > want more than them in a stable release.
> > 
> > I understand, but 'In this stable release SigScheme was introduced,
> > but nothing other was changed!' would not be attractive for users.
> > They would not want to upgrade to such new version.
> 
> I think it worth. But since you had already started the
> development of the message bus facility on the trunk, I change
> the suggestion as follows. Would you think it reasonable?
> 
> 
> I only want 3 sequencial unstable snapshot release from 0.5
> around merging the r5rs branch, as follows.
> 
> 1) Make an unstable release from 0.5 series immediately before
>    merging r5rs branch into the trunk
> 
> 2) Make another unstable release from 0.5 once the merger has
>    become roughly stable

IMHO this phase should be done in r5rs branch.

> 3) Make more another unstable release from 0.5 at 10 days (or 2
>    weeks if patient) after from 2).
> 
> The trunk must be kept unchanged other than r5rs branch merging
> through the days between 1) and 3). This is required to reject
> unstabilizing factors came from other than the SigScheme
> migration.
> 
> Expected benefits are:
> 
>   - The two milestone releases 1) and 3) will become reference
>     points to be compared with subsequent 0.5 series about its
>     behaviors, to locate where a bug comes from
> 
>   - 3) will become new origin which the composer branch based
>     on. I'll forward-port it to the branch

I agree basically.

I have one question. 3) is intended to be only be a origin of
new composer branch? 

If so, I think trunk freezing between 1) and 2) is sufficient.


Regards,

-- 
TOKUNAGA Hiroyuki
tkng at xem jp