This is the mail archive of the
libc-alpha@sourceware.org
mailing list for the glibc project.
Re: Glibc stable release process (Glibc 2.26.1)
- From: Siddhesh Poyarekar <siddhesh at sourceware dot org>
- To: Zack Weinberg <zackw at panix dot com>, "Yann E. MORIN" <yann dot morin dot 1998 at free dot fr>
- Cc: Tulio Magno Quites Machado Filho <tuliom at linux dot vnet dot ibm dot com>, Romain Naour <romain dot naour at gmail dot com>, "libc-alpha at sourceware dot org" <libc-alpha at sourceware dot org>, Joseph Myers <joseph at codesourcery dot com>, "Gabriel F. T. Gomes" <gabriel at inconstante dot eti dot br>, Paul Eggert <eggert at cs dot ucla dot edu>, Arjan van de Ven <arjan at linux dot intel dot com>
- Date: Sun, 1 Oct 2017 05:06:54 +0530
- Subject: Re: Glibc stable release process (Glibc 2.26.1)
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <60f78cac-9cf4-51b1-9ade-21cd09783d96@gmail.com> <874lrli3sx.fsf@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <20170930101833.GA2993@scaer> <CAKCAbMj3ByTofE=WsKV-SXOCWyJYStRKvP3DA9ttiW2hUNZffA@mail.gmail.com>
- Reply-to: siddhesh at sourceware dot org
On Saturday 30 September 2017 05:27 PM, Zack Weinberg wrote:
> I'm a little underslept and I'm not sure I fully understand the issue
> here, but would it help if we literally just tagged point releases and
> pushed tarballs to ftp.gnu.org from a cron job? Once a month if there
> have been any patches since the previous tag, perhaps? With the
> official line being that all patches on the release branches are
> carefully vetted and we recommend tracking the git branch if you can,
> but this is easier for some downstream organizations so we offer this
> as well.
That is probably a waste of resources and also not entirely secure since
it would preclude signing packages.
As a past Fedora maintainer, the feedback I got from a number of package
maintainers and testers in the Fedora community was that it was easier
to bisect bad patches when they were backported piece by piece as
opposed to looking at two tarballs, getting their tags, downloading
upstream sources, making scratch packages for them and then running
tests on them. Given that Debian/Ubuntu follows a similar structure, I
suppose they would have similar problems.
That said, there seem to be at least 3 projects that seem to want this
(Gentoo, Clear Linux, Buildroot project) so I am inclined towards doing
a 2.26.1 point release for them unless anybody has a strong objection to
it. I'll set the release date to somewhere in the middle of October
(I'm flying back home to India from the US West Coast, so I'm likely
going to be in zombie state for a few days and fighting backlog) and
look to add the aarch64 falkor routines to it as well once they're reviewed.
Siddhesh