Hi Ingo, Hi Branden, On Fri, Aug 26 2022 at 02:04:57 PM, "G. Branden Robinson" <g.branden.robin...@gmail.com> wrote: > At 2022-08-26T13:51:25+0200, Ingo Schwarze wrote: >> Also, my best wishes for Bertrands further and speedy recovery! > He has mine as well!
Thanks for your kind words, > Bertrand is going to manage this release as it will apparently take > literally months to get me through FSF processes. In the meantime, he's > hit a smaller process obstacle himself, so at present _he_ can't do a > release candidate either. We expect this to be resolved "soon". I had a technical issue, but the GNU admin reacted very quickly and I should now be able to upload tarballs. >> Wouldn't it be better to simply abandon the the GNU roff project >> (i.e. leaving the FSF with no developer whatsoever), fork groff under >> a new name (say, "GPL roff"), and continue that new project outside >> the FSF? Thanks to the GNU project I've discovered a lot of great pieces of code, and also what's freely sharing code between contributors, so I can only be against such moves. >> > But for the sake of transparency, in the meantime, he asked if the >> > current HEAD was good enough to tag as "rc2" and I said "yes". >> >> Sorry, i fail to understand that. The acronym "RC" stands for "release >> candidate". I would define a "release candidate" as "a version that >> is believed to be ready for release". [...] >> In particular, i'm firmly convinced that issuing an RC while even one >> single blocker issue is unresolved is a blatant contradiction. Before >> an RC, all blockers must either be resolved or explicitly >> re-classified as "not release critical" and re-scheduled for the >> subsequent release. I understand your point Ingo, however the rc1 tag is almost 2 years old, so I feel we need to make a new tag now, and from this tag decide which bugs must absolutely be fixed. I won't release any official 1.23.0 if you consider there is a blocker or that the mandoc is not in a good shape. For sure there will be some bug fixes after rc2 and we'll have an rc3, so it's perhaps not exactly a "Release Candidate", it's a kind of "intermediate tag" or an "alpha release", but I'll still name it rc2, for the sake of simplicity. > Well, then, in a sense we don't have _any_ blockers, because "the tree > isn't red". Yes at least the 'make check' does not fail. If I recall correctly at some point between two 1.22.4.x RC, I had no pdf example generated at all, only empty files; this is the kind of state where I consider groff to be broken. > But according to Savannah, we have 7 blocker issues right now. [...] Ingo, Could you please detail here what is your list of blockers that you think must be absolutely fixed before the official 1.23.0 release? Thanks a lot, Regards, Bertrand
