btrfs-progs tagged as v3.12
Hi everyone,
I've tagged the current btrfs-progs repo as v3.12. The new idea is that instead of making the poor distros pull from git, I'll be creating tagged releases at roughly the same pace as Linus cuts kernels.
Given the volume of btrfs-progs patches, we should have enough new code and fixes to justify releases at least as often as the kernel. Of course, if there are issues that need immediate attention, I'll tag a .y release (v3.12.1 for example).
If the progs changes slow down, we might skip a version. But tracking kernel version numbers makes it easier for me to line up bug reports, mostly because I already devote a fair number of brain cells to remembering how old each kernel is.
Just let me know if there are any questions.
-chris
I'm humbly totally unqualified to comment but that sounds like an excellent idea. Thanks.
I can't say for others but I was put off by the 0.19 forever eternal version which pushed me to investigate GIT... I'm sure that has been putting off many people including distro assemblers.
Just for some positive comment: Good progress, thanks.
Regards,
Martin
(OK, that's the last of the positives for the Christmas present. Back to bugging! ;-) )
Quoted 19 lines · Chris Mason
Hi everyone,
I've tagged the current btrfs-progs repo as v3.12. The new idea is that instead of making the poor distros pull from git, I'll be creating tagged releases at roughly the same pace as Linus cuts kernels.
Given the volume of btrfs-progs patches, we should have enough new code and fixes to justify releases at least as often as the kernel. Of course, if there are issues that need immediate attention, I'll tag a .y release (v3.12.1 for example).
If the progs changes slow down, we might skip a version. But tracking kernel version numbers makes it easier for me to line up bug reports, mostly because I already devote a fair number of brain cells to remembering how old each kernel is.
Just let me know if there are any questions.
-chris
Quoted 11 lines · Chris Mason
Hi everyone,
I've tagged the current btrfs-progs repo as v3.12. The new idea is that instead of making the poor distros pull from git, I'll be creating tagged releases at roughly the same pace as Linus cuts kernels.
Given the volume of btrfs-progs patches, we should have enough new code and fixes to justify releases at least as often as the kernel. Of course, if there are issues that need immediate attention, I'll tag a .y release (v3.12.1 for example).
Quoted 6 lines
If the progs changes slow down, we might skip a version. But tracking kernel version numbers makes it easier for me to line up bug reports, mostly because I already devote a fair number of brain cells to remembering how old each kernel is.
Just let me know if there are any questions.
Cool! I've built it for Fedora 19, 20, and rawhide, updates should trickle out soon.
-Eric
Quoted 5 lines · Chris Mason
Hi everyone,
I've tagged the current btrfs-progs repo as v3.12. The new idea is that instead of making the poor distros pull from git, I'll be creating tagged releases at roughly the same pace as Linus cuts kernels.
Great stuff Chris! The new version is now in Arch's [testing] repository.
Cheers,
Tom
Quoted 11 lines · Chris Mason
Hi everyone,
I've tagged the current btrfs-progs repo as v3.12. The new idea is that instead of making the poor distros pull from git, I'll be creating tagged releases at roughly the same pace as Linus cuts kernels.
Given the volume of btrfs-progs patches, we should have enough new code and fixes to justify releases at least as often as the kernel. Of course, if there are issues that need immediate attention, I'll tag a .y release (v3.12.1 for example).
Quoted 8 lines
If the progs changes slow down, we might skip a version. But tracking kernel version numbers makes it easier for me to line up bug reports, mostly because I already devote a fair number of brain cells to remembering how old each kernel is.
Just let me know if there are any questions.
-chris
Hi Chris,
I don't know if there wasn't enough commits to justify a 3.13 release (I noticed your integration branch stalled 7 weeks ago, so I assume this is the case), but can we expect a 3.14 release shortly after Linus tags the mainline kernel as such?
If the integration branch stall was for another reason (e.g. testing to make sure it was stable enough for primetime), could I suggest pulling in David Sterba's current unstable integration branch, and essentially freezing it for testing now, so that people/distros can test it against the current/last couple of kernel -rcs, so that any obvious bugs are ironed out before 3.14 is tagged proper. Distros typically put packages like this through their own testing period anyway, so a prolonged testing period shouldn't be required upstream.
Thanks for your continued hard work,
WorMzy Tykashi
(sorry if you receive this twice gmail went wrong)
Quoted 19 lines · WorMzy Tykashi
Quoted 18 lines · Chris Mason
Hi everyone,
I've tagged the current btrfs-progs repo as v3.12. The new idea is that instead of making the poor distros pull from git, I'll be creating tagged releases at roughly the same pace as Linus cuts kernels.
Given the volume of btrfs-progs patches, we should have enough new code and fixes to justify releases at least as often as the kernel. Of course, if there are issues that need immediate attention, I'll tag a .y release (v3.12.1 for example).
If the progs changes slow down, we might skip a version. But tracking kernel version numbers makes it easier for me to line up bug reports, mostly because I already devote a fair number of brain cells to remembering how old each kernel is.
Just let me know if there are any questions.
Quoted 9 lines
Quoted 1 line
-chris
Hi Chris,
I don't know if there wasn't enough commits to justify a 3.13 release (I noticed your integration branch stalled 7 weeks ago, so I assume this is the case), but can we expect a 3.14 release shortly after Linus tags the mainline kernel as such?
Yes, I'm redoing the integration branch off of Dave's latest, and started testing it earlier this week. We'll definitely have a 3.14.
Thanks,
Chris
Quoted 33 lines · Chris Mason
Quoted 24 lines · WorMzy Tykashi
Quoted 12 lines · Chris Mason
Hi everyone,
I've tagged the current btrfs-progs repo as v3.12. The new idea is that instead of making the poor distros pull from git, I'll be creating tagged releases at roughly the same pace as Linus cuts kernels.
Given the volume of btrfs-progs patches, we should have enough new code and fixes to justify releases at least as often as the kernel. Of course, if there are issues that need immediate attention, I'll tag a .y release (v3.12.1 for example).
Quoted 8 lines
If the progs changes slow down, we might skip a version. But tracking kernel version numbers makes it easier for me to line up bug reports, mostly because I already devote a fair number of brain cells to remembering how old each kernel is.
Just let me know if there are any questions.
-chris
Quoted 7 lines
Hi Chris,
I don't know if there wasn't enough commits to justify a 3.13 release (I noticed your integration branch stalled 7 weeks ago, so I assume this is the case), but can we expect a 3.14 release shortly after Linus tags the mainline kernel as such?
Quoted 5 lines
Yes, I'm redoing the integration branch off of Dave's latest, and started testing it earlier this week. We'll definitely have a 3.14.
Thanks,
Chris
That's excellent news, thanks for the quick reply!
Cheers,
WorMzy
Quoted 11 lines · Chris Mason
Quoted 7 lines · WorMzy Tykashi
On 25 November 2013 21:45, Chris Mason <[email protected]> wrote:
I don't know if there wasn't enough commits to justify a 3.13 release (I noticed your integration branch stalled 7 weeks ago, so I assume this is the case), but can we expect a 3.14 release shortly after Linus tags the mainline kernel as such?
Yes, I'm redoing the integration branch off of Dave's latest, and started testing it earlier this week. We'll definitely have a 3.14.
Hi,
Do you have a release date?
Cheers,
Signature · 3 lines
Sébastien "Seblu" Luttringer https://seblu.net | Twitter: @seblu42 GPG: 0x2072D77A