Blockers in Bugfix-Releases (Re: [Release Planning 3.6] Samba 3.6.6 on May 31 (was May 24)?)

Karolin Seeger kseeger at
Thu Jun 7 13:33:30 MDT 2012

On Tue, Jun 05, 2012 at 11:54:27PM +0200, Björn JACKE wrote:
> On 2012-06-05 at 14:06 +0200 Michael Adam sent off:
> > Opinions?
> +1
> and thanks for proposing this on the list once more. We will have (at least) 5
> months between the last ordinary 3.6 release on January 29th and the next
> bugfix release (June 25th, unless more blocking bugs pop up).  That also means
> we have bugs that have been fixed 5 months ago without pushing them into a
> release that our users can benefit from. That's suboptimal.

Yes, that's true, but it's a special situation because of the three
security releases. Otherwise, there would have been bugfix releases in the

Security releases, especially when all three branches are affected, are
very time-consuming!

Additionally, another issue popped up and came across the release
planning. But you are aware of that. Very unusual cricumstances.

So you guys want to ship bugfix releases with severe known issues?
That might work with more developers working on bugs on a regular basis.
Currently, it does not. There are severe bugs that need to be addressed
before the next bugfix release. Otherwise, they would never be addressed.
IMHO blockers are needed to create a certain pressure.

Of course a release should not be delayed due to minor issues. If that
ever happened, please let me know.



More information about the samba-technical mailing list