[tei-council] the release conundrum
lou.burnard at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk
Sun Jul 17 18:02:35 EDT 2005
This is all fine by me, though just for the record I think I should
point out that the editors are right out of acolytes.
Sebastian Rahtz wrote:
> I have tried to streamline our release offerings. We now have
> a) CVS
> b) a release which consists of:
> - debian and RPM packages
> - SF file releases
> - a duplicate of a Debian release on the TEI web site.
> the existing copies of P4 and P5 DTDs and Guidelines have now been
> removed, and the URLs are now silently redirected to the
> "release" tree.
> c) packages for Knoppix and Windows Emacs (not in sync yet)
> d) distribution by oXygen
> we are now at release 0.1.10.
> My view of the process is as follows:
> 1) the editors or their acolytes change CVS as they need to. it is not
> guarenteed to "work" at any given time.
> 2) when a consensus emerges that something interesting has happened,
> or that 6 months has passed,
> the editors will instruct the release manager (currently me) to
> prepare all the outputs in b) above
> and release them as close together as possible
> 3) the Knoppix and Emacs releases are a project of TEI Oxford which
> will follow a timetable of their own
> 4) we will all do our best to assist the oXygen people stay in sycn and
> be forewarned of important changes
> 5) the editors do not need permission from the Council to make minimo
> releases (ie 0.1.13), but
> the council will discuss making a minor release (0.2.0), and the
> council and board will both
> discuss making a major release (1.0.0)
> I would propose now that we plan to make the 0.2.0 release after the
> class and attribute changes have been
> How does that sound?
More information about the tei-council