[Scummvm-devel] ScummVM 1.1.0 has been tagged

[Max Horn]

Hi Travis, all,


Am 01.04.2010 um 05:20 schrieb Travis Howell:

> Why did ScummVM 1.1.0 get tagged, when we still have regressions? bugs 
> #2961787, #2976353 for example. It is still not clear how many of the 
> Nippon Safe bugs are regressions either, due to that recent load/save issue.

It was made clear by Peres the he cannot work on these bugs. And nobody else offered to work on them. So there seems to be no point in waiting for a magic resolution of these. OK, we can delay 1.1.0 -- by weeks? Months? And then we release a ScummVM which lags by that amount behind the ScummVM trunk.

It's a trade off. I think it's better to get regular releases out, not just for commercial products, but especially also for open source products. You disagree. Fine. 

Tell you what, you can act as the release manager for the next release! How about that? I am completely serious. It might mean we won't get another release before 2011 or 2012, but I don't mind, as long as nobody is going to blame *me* for it :-).



> The new tools still lack more thorough public testing, it seems we 
> failed to ask for more testing in this case. Should we risk releasing 
> new tools which aren't as well tested? or maybe wait longer for more 
> public testing and handle separately this time?

Yes, we should risk it, because waiting won't solve any problems. Only *working* will solve them. Nobody is working on this, as far as I can tell. Nobody is working on organizing this public testing. As with the release management, I cordially invite you to do this for the next time around, Eugene (who currently has -1 time for ScummVM) and me (who currently has 0.1 time for ScummVM) would most definitely glad for help with that. Just because we are project admins doesn't automatically mean that we must do all the annoying, tiresome, boring work alone, right? :-). 

So, as with NIPPON, just waiting won't solve anything. By making a release, at least we will get a wider public testing.


> We are not a commercial product, and don't have any reasons that a major 
> release must be produced by a specific date. So I really don't see why 
> major releases are pushed through, when they are good reasons 
> (regressions in this case) for delays.

See above. I don't think commercial vs. non-commercial has any relevance here.


> With ScummVM been used more often for games releases (i.e. on Good Old 
> Games), I think it is even more important to avoid any regressions in 
> stable games. If we keep letting known regressions in stable games 
> through, than it seems more like ScummVM is going backwards. Which is 
> only going to cause problems for users who specifically stick to major 
> releases, to avoid regressions and more stability.

I always prefer to avoid regressions, if I see any chance for that. In this case, I don't. Hence my decision not to wait for this. The regressions will be clearly mentioned in the release announcement, telling any NIPPON players to wait for 1.1.1. This seems like an acceptable tradeoff to me.


Bye,
Max