[Mesa3d-dev] Re: [Xorg] Code freeze extension

[Brian Paul]

Eric Anholt wrote:
> On Fri, 2004-08-13 at 11:23, Brian Paul wrote:
> 
>>Kevin E Martin wrote:
>>
>>>On today's release wranglers call, we decided to move the code freeze
>>>deadline until 11AM EDT, Monday 16 Aug 2004.  This will allow several of
>>>us to finish fixing the remaining bugs.
>>>
>>>After the code freeze, the first release candidate tag will be made for
>>>people to test against.  The volunteers who signed up to build release
>>>packages should plan to make new packages available after tree is
>>>tagged.
>>>
>>>We also decided that, after Monday's code freeze, nothing is to be
>>>checked into the tree without the approval of the release manager (me).
>>>All release blocker bug fixes that you want to have considered for this
>>>release will need to be entered into bugzilla (with associated patch).
>>
>>I've been kind of out of touch with DRI / X development lately, but it 
>>looks like the current Mesa CVS trunk and the DRI tree's DRM modules 
>>will be going into this release.  Is that correct?
>>
>>The Mesa CVS trunk doesn't constitute a normal Mesa release yet.  I 
>>was planning on eventually wrapping up the trunk as the 6.1 
>>(development) release.  The last Mesa stable release was 6.0.1 and bug 
>>fixes relative to it are on the mesa_6_0_branch branch in CVS.  I 
>>don't think any of the DRI driver developers have been putting 
>>anything into that branch though.
>>
>>That said, I _think_ the Mesa CVS trunk is fairly stable code at this 
>>point.  Perhaps I should make the 6.1 release ASAP, just so things are 
>>somewhat synchronized.  Comments?
> 
> 
> At this point, given that the X.Org tree is still monolithic, our Mesa
> usage is somewhat independent of Mesa releases in my view.  I chose to
> integrate the development branch because of the great advances made in
> the DRI drivers in general (though we have some issues to resolve still,
> as bugzilla shows), though I was concerned about using something that
> wasn't blessed as a release.
> 
> I would like to continue using the current codebase, though we should
> probably make it clear in glxinfo (for example) that this is a
> development branch we're using.  That is, unless a release were to
> happen from the head branch the next couple of days.

Well, I could probably make the Mesa 6.1 release this weekend (since I 
was planning on working anyway).  I've got some memory leak fixes (see 
bug 1002030) that I haven't checked into the trunk yet (but are 
checked into the mesa_6_0_branch branch).  I asked Kevin about 
checking them in but haven't heard back yet.

Does anyone object to taking the trunk code we have today and making 
the 6.1 release?  I'm not aware of any loose ends in it at this time.

-Brian