[ros-dev] The situation with version 0.4.14

[Colin Finck]

Hey Victor,

Thanks for bringing up that topic again. Indeed, it's really time for 
0.4.14..

I want to get forward with the release, hence I tend to vote for 1.
However, it's also wrong to just ignore Joachim's tremendous work in 
compiling the list of regressions, and his valid concerns.

Which is why I suggest a compromise: Let's come together next weekend 
(20/21 February) and try to kill as many regressions as possible: 
https://reactos.org/wiki/Tests_for_0.4.14#known_unfixed_regressions_in_descending_order_of_introduction

It may or may not work, but then we have at least tried everything we 
can as a volunteer-driven open-source project.

Who else is going to join?

Cheers,

Colin


Am 09.02.2021 um 16:47 schrieb Victor Perevertkin:
> Hello!
> 
> It seems for me that it's time to bring up the topic about our RC
> version - 0.4.14.
> 
> Our current "stable", 0.4.13 was branched on 30 September, 2019
> (remember those peacefull pre-COVID times :D)
> That's quite some time, but not the main issue I'd like to discuss.
> 
> 0.4.14 was branched on 24 April, 2020. That's almost a year already.
> And we're in a difficult situation here - there are regressions, but
> nobody fixed them within this long time.
> According to https://reactos.org/wiki/Tests_for_0.4.14, there are 29
> unfixed regressions found for this release. I'd like to point out: most
> of them are among usermode and non-kernel/driver functionality, and as
> our development is mostly focused in the kernel right now, it's
> unexpected for them to be fixed unless a volunteer comes up.
> 
> A quick reminder. Our "releases" mechanism is useful for finding
> regressions in the first place, there is no that much benefit for users
> here, because we're still a "deep" alpha. Correct me if I'm wrong.
> Joakim made a great job finding all regressions, and this work won't be
> lost in any case.
> 
> We can't wait forever and I think it's time to resolve this situation
> somehow. I see two options:
> 1. Release 0.4.14 as-is. There were a lot more buggy releases, nobody
> dies from this.
> 2. Skip 0.4.14. This already happened once in the history of the
> project - 0.3.2 was skipped. I wasn't around at the time, but I may
> guess that reasons were similar to what we have today.
> (3.) Fix the bugs quickly. I don't expect this to happen, but who
> knows, maybe a volunteer appears :)
> 
> Let's vote. This seem to be the only way for us to decide on things.
> Votes from the team members will be collected until 1 March.
> 
> ===
> 
> I personally vote for skipping the release. The work on finding
> regressions is already done, so the most important part of a release
> cycle for us is there (thanks Joakim!)
> If we do a release now, all the stuff we were writing in news reports
> for the last 6 month would be missing from it. That would cause (as I
> think) a lot of confusion to people. Moreover 0.4.14 is not that
> featureful release itself (compared to 0.4.13, which brought the new
> USB stack)
> So I suggest to move on and start checking 0.4.15 for regressions. I
> expect quite some of them to appear and we need time for fixing.
> 
> 
> Cheers,
> Victor
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Ros-dev mailing list
> Ros-dev at reactos.org
> http://reactos.org/mailman/listinfo/ros-dev
> 

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: OpenPGP_signature
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 840 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://reactos.org/pipermail/ros-dev/attachments/20210215/f64da352/attachment.sig>