On Saturday, July 19, 2003, at 06:29 AM, marcus at ira.uka.de wrote:

> ...
> Ok, I looked at the code, no problems visible. This touches some more
> classes, but the
> changes are simple and local to the FileList services.... but maybe
> better
> for 3.7alpha (don't know...). (This makes me again feel bad about 
> beeing
> beta
> at this point...). Should this be approved for 3.6? Approvals for 3.7 
> do
> not
> make sense IMHO, because it is important that approved stuff gets added
> to the update stream ASAP. If approved stuff rots for 2 months, we need
> to
> look closely again, because chances of conflicts with other stuff is
> high.

Actually 3.7alpha will be started quite soon, when we move 3.6 to 
gamma, which should be in less than a week.  So I think it would be 
okay to postpone this sort of stuff until 3.7alpha, since it won't 
"rot" for very long. :-)  We can just incorporate fixes into 3.6beta 
right now.

3.6 was supposed to move to gamma yesterday, I believe, but since we 
shrunk the beta cycle a bit, I think we could probably shrink the gamma 
cycle an equivalent amount.  Say, 2 1/2 weeks for beta, 1 1/2 weeks for 
gamma.  Which would mean we should to 3.6gamma around next Tuesday.  
3.6final is still August 1st.

By the way, I have been checking all of the approved changesets for 
conflicts as I incorporate them, with the ConflictChecker.  It makes 
sense for me to do it because incorporation-time is the time when we 
are sure that conflicts can be resolved... On the other hand, at 
approval time, you never know if some other change is going to conflict 
in the next week or so.

Checking for conflicts hasn't been too painful so far... the 
ConflictChecker just requires a single button-push to find direct 
conflicts for a changeset.  For example, in the last batch of 21 
updates, there was one changeset which had a conflict that I had to 
manually fix.  However, if a changeset is quite old and has lots of 
conflicts as I'm trying to incorporate it, I might give it back to the 
author to resolve the conflicts, but I haven't had to do this yet.

- Doug Way