[Python-Dev] RELEASED: Python 2.2.1
11 Apr 2002 14:04:27 +0100
"Fred L. Drake, Jr." <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
> Michael Hudson writes:
> > Me, obviously. I think I said when I did it here.
> You probably did, but there was a pretty mail volume earlier this
> week, so probably got lost in the pile. ;-) Heck, it might even
> still be waiting for me to get to it!
> > Well, only the 48 hour plan I posted to python-dev. Admittedly that
> > didn't say when I would tag the tree.
> I liked having the plan. Perhaps this could be added to the release
> procedure PEPs.
Yeah. The PEP need to have an axe taken to it now that we ignore sf,
> > Can some who knows how sort out the CVS mess? I can learn, I guess,
> > but I'd rather not risk cocking it up.
> > The other changes that were made in the process of building the
> > windows installer and the docs I really don't care about (i.e. the
> > changes Trent posted).
> > Is this worth updating the tarball for?
> Avoiding this question is why we need the specific coordination on the
> tagging. ;-)
Perhaps. I'm not sure it would have helped, unless someone had said
"you have run cvs up -d, haven't you?".
> Should the tarball define the release, or does the release define
> the tarball? Doesn't matter as long as they're the same. The value
> of the tag is that it reflects the release.
How many people build the docs from source?
> Since the tarball went out broken (not matching the files used to
> build), I'm not sure what should be done to fix things. I'll be glad
> to handle the CVS machinery if the determination is that the tag
> should be moved.
I really think CVS should be fixed. It's not really a case of moving
a tag, it's more a case of adding files to a tag.
 and WTF does cvs not pick up new directories by default? How is
that a good idea?
Never meddle in the affairs of NT. It is slow to boot and quick to
crash. -- Stephen Harris