Releasing 4.11

[Joel Sherrill]

I agree. We need new release procedures and supporting scripts. Whatever that entails.

+1 on the GSOC code. We need to ping each student and merge.

I have a patch to update a BSD .h file in Newlib. I posted it but no one commented. It needs addressing so 4.11 doesn't need any patches to work more on the new TCP stack.

--joel

Gedare Bloom <gedare at rtems.org> wrote:


I'd like to see how much of the last GSOC can be committed. I'm going
to push the atomics through shortly.

I'm not sure how much of the old scripts we should keep, and what we
should just forge ahead with and define new processes. Maybe we can
"set a date" and work through the process on IRC, once we get the
outstanding problems resolved.

On Thu, Feb 7, 2013 at 3:56 PM, Joel Sherrill <Joel.Sherrill at oarcorp.com> wrote:
> That's the biggest hurdle.
>
> Redo the Makefile.maint to use got.
>
> Rename the change log files
>
> Daniel Hellstrom has some patches but we may have to wait for them since he is just coming back from new parent leave.
>
> We may want to do a warning sweep and definitely a test sweep.
> Chris has mentioned a standard report at release time and this may be an opportunity to define that.
>
> --joel
>
> Gedare Bloom <gedare at rtems.org> wrote:
>
>
> Hi,
>
> What will it take to release 4.11.0?
>
> Off the top of my head, I know that the ARM toolchain needs to be
> fixed, and we need to decide on what version of tools should be
> packaged with the release. Other issues relate to actually cutting and
> testing the release, which can be dealt with during the actual release
> once we "set a date".
>
> -Gedare
> _______________________________________________
> rtems-devel mailing list
> rtems-devel at rtems.org
> http://www.rtems.org/mailman/listinfo/rtems-devel