6 Jun
2008
6 Jun
'08
12:28 p.m.
Hi,
The current state of 3.0 is quite encouraging. I suggest a round of
testing this summer, followed by -alpha early August, -beta in late
August, -rc1 in mid-September ... and we'll see depending on the feedback.
Marc
10 Jun
10 Jun
5:26 p.m.
Hi Marc,
On Friday 6 June 2008 18:28, Marc Delisle wrote:
The current state of 3.0 is quite encouraging. I
suggest a round of
testing this summer, followed by -alpha early August, -beta in late
August, -rc1 in mid-September ... and we'll see depending on the feedback.
From a distributor's point of view the following.
If the final 3.0 will be released after September we probably won't be able to
ship it in the next Debian stable. That is not a problem in and of itself,
however, it means that we need to security support the 2.11 branch for at
least the period until the next stable release comes out + 1 year. That is
our responsibility, but I was wondering whether you as upstream authors would
be willing to provide some kind of security-only support for the 2.11 branch
for some time period.
It might influence the decision on which version we would include in the next
stable release.
cheers,
Thijs
11 Jun
11 Jun
1:46 a.m.
Thijs Kinkhorst schrieb:
Hi Marc,
On Friday 6 June 2008 18:28, Marc Delisle wrote:
2.11 will be supported even after 3.0 is released, this is already planned
i think this will last _AT MINIMUM_ 1 year after 3.0 is released
--
Sebastian Mendel
The current state of 3.0 is quite encouraging. I
suggest a round of
testing this summer, followed by -alpha early August, -beta in late
August, -rc1 in mid-September ... and we'll see depending on the feedback.
From a distributor's point of view the following.
If the final 3.0 will be released after September we probably won't be able to
ship it in the next Debian stable. That is not a problem in and of itself,
however, it means that we need to security support the 2.11 branch for at
least the period until the next stable release comes out + 1 year. That is
our responsibility, but I was wondering whether you as upstream authors would
be willing to provide some kind of security-only support for the 2.11 branch
for some time period. 
5:42 a.m.
Hi
On Tue, 10 Jun 2008 23:26:53 +0200
Thijs Kinkhorst <thijs(a)debian.org> wrote:
If the final 3.0 will be released after September we
probably won't be able to
ship it in the next Debian stable. That is not a problem in and of itself,
however, it means that we need to security support the 2.11 branch for at
least the period until the next stable release comes out + 1 year. That is
our responsibility, but I was wondering whether you as upstream authors would
be willing to provide some kind of security-only support for the 2.11 branch
for some time period.
It will get not only security fixes but also bugfixes, because it will
be only version still supporting older PHP and MySQL versions. I think
we talked about at least one year support for it.
It might influence the decision on which version we
would include in the next
stable release.
We have to stay with 2.11, 3.0 will be too late for Lenny if there
won't be major changes in release schedule. I think there is no chance
that phpMyAdmin 3.0 will be ready in mid of July 2008.
--
Michal Čihař | http://cihar.com | http://blog.cihar.com
7:15 a.m.
Thijs Kinkhorst a écrit :
Hi Marc,
On Friday 6 June 2008 18:28, Marc Delisle wrote:
phpMyAdmin 3.0 requires PHP 5.2 and MySQL 5.0 so phpMyAdmin 2.11 will be
security-supported for some time, at least a year like Sebastian said.
Marc
The current state of 3.0 is quite encouraging. I
suggest a round of
testing this summer, followed by -alpha early August, -beta in late
August, -rc1 in mid-September ... and we'll see depending on the feedback.
From a distributor's point of view the following.
If the final 3.0 will be released after September we probably won't be able to
ship it in the next Debian stable. That is not a problem in and of itself,
however, it means that we need to security support the 2.11 branch for at
least the period until the next stable release comes out + 1 year. That is
our responsibility, but I was wondering whether you as upstream authors would
be willing to provide some kind of security-only support for the 2.11 branch
for some time period.
It might influence the decision on which version we would include in the next
stable release.
cheers,
Thijs
5:38 a.m.
Hi
On Fri, 06 Jun 2008 12:28:45 -0400
Marc Delisle <Marc.Delisle(a)cegepsherbrooke.qc.ca> wrote:
The current state of 3.0 is quite encouraging. I
suggest a round of
testing this summer, followed by -alpha early August, -beta in late
August, -rc1 in mid-September ... and we'll see depending on the feedback.
I don't remember exact time frame for GSoC, but the last beta should
be IMHO after both GSoC things are done and merged.
--
Michal Čihař | http://cihar.com | http://blog.cihar.com
5:43 a.m.
Michal Čihař schrieb:
Hi
On Fri, 06 Jun 2008 12:28:45 -0400
Marc Delisle <Marc.Delisle(a)cegepsherbrooke.qc.ca> wrote:
i did not heard anything from GSoC ... is there any source blog or something
similar, what shows progress of this?
--
Sebastian Mendel
The current state of 3.0 is quite encouraging. I
suggest a round of
testing this summer, followed by -alpha early August, -beta in late
August, -rc1 in mid-September ... and we'll see depending on the feedback.
I don't remember exact time frame for GSoC, but the last beta should
be IMHO after both GSoC things are done and merged.
5:52 a.m.
On Wed, 11 Jun 2008 11:43:54 +0200
Sebastian Mendel <lists(a)sebastianmendel.de> wrote:
i did not heard anything from GSoC ... is there any
source blog or something
similar, what shows progress of this?
Every week, report is sent to http://lists.mysql.com/soc
My student is still busy with school right now, so there is not much
progress so far.
--
Michal Čihař | http://cihar.com | http://blog.cihar.com
6:17 a.m.
Michal Čihař schrieb:
On Wed, 11 Jun 2008 11:43:54 +0200
Sebastian Mendel <lists(a)sebastianmendel.de> wrote:
oh, thanks
before asking stupid questions their:
Piotr Przybylski:
i did not heard anything from GSoC ... is there
any source blog or something
similar, what shows progress of this?
Every week, report is sent to http://lists.mysql.com/soc KEY ACCOMPLISHMENTS LAST WEEK
- no time so nothing except getting svn permissions to work
is he talking about PMA SVN access? did he requested or got granted access
to SVN?
--
Sebastian
6:21 a.m.
On Wed, 11 Jun 2008 12:17:10 +0200
Sebastian Mendel <lists(a)sebastianmendel.de> wrote:
Michal Čihař schrieb:
No, he prefers to use own SVN repo for development.
--
Michal Čihař | http://cihar.com | http://blog.cihar.com
On Wed, 11 Jun 2008 11:43:54 +0200
Sebastian Mendel <lists(a)sebastianmendel.de> wrote:
oh, thanks
before asking stupid questions their:
Piotr Przybylski:
i did not heard anything from GSoC ... is there
any source blog or something
similar, what shows progress of this?
Every week, report is sent to http://lists.mysql.com/soc KEY ACCOMPLISHMENTS LAST WEEK
- no time so nothing except getting svn permissions to work
is he talking about PMA SVN access? did he requested or got granted access
to SVN?
6:26 a.m.
Michal Čihař schrieb:
On Wed, 11 Jun 2008 12:17:10 +0200
Sebastian Mendel <lists(a)sebastianmendel.de> wrote:
where could this be accessed?
--
Sebastian Mendel
Michal Čihař schrieb:
No, he prefers to use own SVN repo for development. On Wed, 11 Jun 2008 11:43:54 +0200
Sebastian Mendel <lists(a)sebastianmendel.de> wrote:
oh, thanks
before asking stupid questions their:
Piotr Przybylski:
i did not heard anything from GSoC ... is there
any source blog or something
similar, what shows progress of this?
Every week, report is sent to
http://lists.mysql.com/soc KEY ACCOMPLISHMENTS LAST WEEK
- no time so nothing except getting svn permissions to work
is he talking about
PMA SVN access? did he requested or got granted access
to SVN?
6:30 a.m.
On Wed, 11 Jun 2008 12:26:12 +0200
Sebastian Mendel <lists(a)sebastianmendel.de> wrote:
where could this be accessed?
It should be later here: https://trac.nq.pl/pma/
--
Michal Čihař | http://cihar.com | http://blog.cihar.com
6:22 a.m.
Michal Čihař schrieb:
On Wed, 11 Jun 2008 11:43:54 +0200
Sebastian Mendel <lists(a)sebastianmendel.de> wrote:
about Raj Kissu:
issn't he advised or granted to use a branch in PMA SVN?
(didn't find the mentioned download at http://code.kissu.org/)
--
Sebastian Mendel
i did not heard anything from GSoC ... is there
any source blog or something
similar, what shows progress of this?
Every week, report is sent to http://lists.mysql.com/soc
7:26 a.m.
Sebastian Mendel a écrit :
Michal Čihař schrieb:
It's not clear yet how he wants to proceed but in his Week 2 report he
said that he'll upload some code to his site next week.
On Wed, 11 Jun 2008 11:43:54 +0200
Sebastian Mendel <lists(a)sebastianmendel.de> wrote:
about Raj Kissu:
issn't he advised or granted to use a branch in PMA SVN?
(didn't find the mentioned download at http://code.kissu.org/)
i did not heard anything from GSoC ... is there
any source blog or something
similar, what shows progress of this?
Every week, report is sent to
http://lists.mysql.com/soc
7:19 a.m.
Michal Čihař a écrit :
Hi
On Fri, 06 Jun 2008 12:28:45 -0400
Marc Delisle <Marc.Delisle(a)cegepsherbrooke.qc.ca> wrote:
Why? We can schedule a new feature for 3.1, for example. In fact I would
prefer to schedule the GSoC features for 3.1, because "we" have enough
testing to do on the current 3.0-dev this summer.
Marc
The current state of 3.0 is quite encouraging. I
suggest a round of
testing this summer, followed by -alpha early August, -beta in late
August, -rc1 in mid-September ... and we'll see depending on the feedback.
I don't remember exact time frame for GSoC, but the last beta should
be IMHO after both GSoC things are done and merged.
31 Jul
31 Jul
9:08 a.m.
Marc Delisle a écrit :
Michal Čihař a écrit :
Just to recap and to get more feedback: I think that the last bunch of
new code that should be merged for 3.0 is the update for Swekey auth,
which is due in a few days.
Then we can
- declare a feature freeze
- open QA_3.0
- ask translators for updates
- switch trunk to 3.1
As I said I prefer to merge Google Summer of Code features (BLOB
streaming and the new setup code) in 3.1.
Marc
Hi
On Fri, 06 Jun 2008 12:28:45 -0400
Marc Delisle <Marc.Delisle(a)cegepsherbrooke.qc.ca> wrote:
Why? We can schedule a new feature for 3.1, for example. In fact I would
prefer to schedule the GSoC features for 3.1, because "we" have enough
testing to do on the current 3.0-dev this summer.
Marc The current state of 3.0 is quite encouraging. I
suggest a round of
testing this summer, followed by -alpha early August, -beta in late
August, -rc1 in mid-September ... and we'll see depending on the feedback.
I
don't remember exact time frame for GSoC, but the last beta should
be IMHO after both GSoC things are done and merged.
5 Aug
5 Aug
3:39 a.m.
Hi
Dne Thu, 31 Jul 2008 09:08:34 -0400
Marc Delisle <Marc.Delisle(a)cegepsherbrooke.qc.ca> napsal(a):
Just to recap and to get more feedback: I think that
the last bunch of
new code that should be merged for 3.0 is the update for Swekey auth,
which is due in a few days.
Then we can
- declare a feature freeze
- open QA_3.0
- ask translators for updates
- switch trunk to 3.1
As I said I prefer to merge Google Summer of Code features (BLOB
streaming and the new setup code) in 3.1.
Okay for me.
--
Michal Čihař | http://cihar.com | http://phpmyadmin.cz
5834
days inactive
5894
days old
16 comments
4 participants
participants (4)
-
Marc Delisle -
Michal Čihař -
Sebastian Mendel -
Thijs Kinkhorst