1.6 release?

[Juan Manuel Palacios]

On Nov 12, 2007, at 1:30 AM, Ryan Schmidt wrote:

> I fixed a handful of ports one evening, then got distracted with  
> other MacPorts issues the next days. I'll continue working on cd  
> issues as I can, but it'll take awhile. Also, only half of the  
> affected ports are nomaintainer, so maintainers will have to step up  
> and fix their ports. But they probably don't read this list and/or  
> probably aren't running trunk so they haven't become aware of the  
> problem yet. We could send a mass email to the maintainers of all  
> these ports, and maybe some of them would then get into gear. I  
> could send such an email if you want.


	That would be great, thanks! Any idea about how many committers such  
notice would span? Don't forget to Cc this list ;-)

>
>
> I don't like the idea of releasing 1.6 as is and waiting for the bug  
> reports to come in. I currently have a bad impression of Leopard due  
> to all the bug reports we're getting from Leopard users. Even if  
> sometimes the affected software is the problem, I blame Leopard.  
> Leopard "broke" these ports. In the same way, if users install  
> MacPorts 1.6 and are suddenly unable to install ports they depend  
> on, they'll consider MacPorts 1.6 the problem, even if individual  
> ports should be fixed.
>
> So I would like to either delay 1.6 until all these ports are fixed,  
> or change 1.6 so that the cd command is available again. There was,  
> I suspect, a single commit which removed the cd command from trunk.  
> Simply don't merge that commit to the 1.6 branch. Oh wait, you  
> haven't branched 1.6 yet. Ok, so branch for 1.6, then reverse-merge  
> that specific commit. Wait to remove the cd command from MacPorts  
> until the ports are fixed.
>


	No merging will take place, as I'll branch 1.6 anew off trunk ToT.  
I'm hoping to do it very soon now, this week maybe, so we'll have to  
decide between implementing an alternative, depending on what Kevin  
says, or delaying the hiding of the cd command (it was simply  
prepended with an underscore), 'cause diving into every single  
Portfile to code particular workarounds might be a bit too much for  
any other than maintainers.

	Regards,...


-jmpp