216
edits
Online Developer Meeting (2024-02-27): Difference between revisions
→Today's topics
| (4 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown) | |||
| Line 4: | Line 4: | ||
== Today's topics == | == Today's topics == | ||
* Status of 9.1 Release | * Status of 9.1 Release | ||
** Are there remaining blocker bugs? | ** Are there remaining blocker bugs? -- None. In case of issues, a version 9.2 could be released early. | ||
** Do we issue a second release candidate (RC2)? | ** Do we issue a second release candidate (RC2)? -- No RC2. jwe will proceed to create a release tarball for Octave 9.1 and the Windows installers shortly. | ||
* Common id tag for developer of Octave packages in AppStream Metainfo files? | |||
** Should they use a different tag from the identifier of core Octave? See [https://savannah.gnu.org/patch/?10434 core patch] and [https://github.com/gnu-octave/octave-doctest/pull/286 package change/discussion] | |||
** Conclusions: no strong feelings. Each package should generally decide what they want: if they feel that <code>id="octave.org"</code> and <code><name>Octave Community</name></code> describes their community, that's probably fine. If in doubt, just ask. | |||
* How to handle pull requests for the mirror on GitHub? | * How to handle pull requests for the mirror on GitHub? | ||
* | * New bug reports on Savannah for packages should be tagged by the package name in parenthesis at the start of the report title. E.g., "(statistics) some error" (i.e., no longer prepend with "[octave forge]"). Also, set the report category to "Octave package". Try to CC package developers. | ||
== Previous topics == | == Previous topics == | ||