[phpMyAdmin Developers] Schedule for 4.6
madhura.cj at gmail.com
Mon Feb 8 10:11:06 CET 2016
On Mon, Feb 8, 2016 at 7:35 PM, Michal Čihař <michal at cihar.com> wrote:
> Dne 8.2.2016 v 05:28 Isaac Bennetch napsal(a):
> > On 2/7/16 4:55 PM, Madhura Jayaratne wrote:
> >> On Sat, Feb 6, 2016 at 2:41 AM, Isaac Bennetch <bennetch at gmail.com
> >> <mailto:bennetch at gmail.com>> wrote:
> >> Hi,
> >> On 2/4/16 9:30 AM, Michal Čihař wrote:
> >> > Hi
> >> >
> >> > looking at the milestones  and remembering past discussions, we
> >> > should be getting ready for releasing 4.6. It's planned for
> release in a
> >> > month, so it's about time to do feature freeze...
> >> >
> >> > Do we want to keep this schedule? If so, I suggest branching
> QA_4_6 soon.
> >> >
> >> > :https://github.com/phpmyadmin/phpmyadmin/milestones
> >> I am also fine with a feature freeze.
> Okay, let's do it! The branch QA_4_6 is now there.
> >> I'm okay with a feature freeze, but I think there are several bugs
> >> are still blocking 4.6.
> >> What do you think? I think there are enough features and fixes that
> >> should release 4.6 relatively soon.
> >> My suggestion is that we should use the milestone for issues that
> >> blockers for the release, for instance I'd like to add the 4.6.0
> >> milestone to https://github.com/phpmyadmin/phpmyadmin/issues/11916
> >> that we can see at a glance that the issue needs to be fixed before
> >> release.
> >> The issue looks to me like a bug and will be fixed despite the feature
> >> freeze.
> >> This is a bit of a change from how we've been using milestones
> >> which has -generally- been only to mark an issue after it's been
> >> I also like this approach of using milestones
> Marking open issues which we should fix for release is good approach.
> I've already marked some things such.
> >> Does the release of 4.6 mean there will be no 4.5.4, or do we plan
> >> support 4.5 for some time after the release of 4.6?
> >> You probably meant 4.5.5? Looking at the expected dates set for
> >> milestones in , 4.5.5 is due on February 22nd while 4.6 is due on
> >> March 1st. So, I guess we will have a 4.5.5 and I do not see a need to
> >> do further releases from QA_4_5 branch.
> > Yes, I meant 4.5.5. I can do 4.5.5 later in the month and prepare for
> > 4.6. If there is no further discussion, I'll expect to release 4.6.0-rc1
> > later this week.
> Doing 4.5.5 sounds like a good idea. There are some fixes in the QA_4_5
> branch. Also I think we've started quite late with feature freeze, so
> maybe we can adjust 4.6 release to monthly schedule as well? So how
> about shifting it to 22nd March?
That sounds reasonable.
> > Please take a look at my draft of the release notes at
> > and let me know (or edit directly) if you have any suggestions.
> Looks okay to me.
> > Double-checking about branches, as part of the -rc release I'll create a
> > new branch QA_4_6 which will be a branch off of current master (this
> > part does not look scripted). As part of the 4.5.5 release, I'll branch
> > MAINT_4_5_5 off of the current QA_4_5, and QA_4_5 will eventually get
> > deleted. Finally, note that tags are not created for -rc releases.
> That sounds pretty much correct. I've created the QA_4_6 branch right
> now. I'm not sure if we want to start with -rc or rather -alpha now...
> If the release is on March 22nd, I think we have enough time to do all
-alpha, -beta and -rc releases.
Thanks and Regards,
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Developers