[tei-council] Next Release; Codename: GroundHog Day

[James Cummings]

Just a reminder that any bugs, typos, corrections, and 
schema-affecting changes you've spotted in the Guidelines should 
be fixed by midnight tonight.  This gives us all of Wednesday 1st 
of Feb for proofreading and corrections of any additional typos 
we find, with an intended release by MartinH on Thursday 2 February.

Is the next release going to be 2.1.0 or 2.0.2?  Correct me if 
I'm wrong but If there have been schema-affecting changes then 
the second number is meant to increment. Have there been 
schema-affecting changes since 2.0.1?

-James

On 18/01/12 00:13, James Cummings wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> Since no one else has piped up, can I suggest a schedule:
>
> 31 January midnight GMT: submission deadline of significant changes
> 1 February: Whole Day for council to proofread and correct typos.
> 2nd February: Release (Codename: Groundhog Day)
>
> Since Martin asked, I suggest him as release technician.
>
> Any reasons why these dates are wholly unsuitable?
>
> -James
>
> On 17/01/12 16:11, Gabriel Bodard wrote:
>> Has there been any consensus on when 2.0.2 might be put out?
>>
>> (I ask because, if it's soon I won't both hacking the EpiDoc schema to
>> allow geo/@decl; I'll just wait for TEI to introduce it and regenerate
>> the schema properly. :-) )
>>
>> G
>>
>> On 2012-01-12 17:39, Martin Holmes wrote:
>>> Hi all,
>>>
>>> I think we need to release a 2.0.2 soon, during which we again run
>>> through the instructions, after adding the tagging instruction. Should
>>> we do a quick trawl through the tickets and decide which ones might beS
>>> polished off quickly without controversy?
>>>
>>> Can I be the one to go through the release steps this time?
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>> Martin
>>>
>>> On 12-01-12 08:27 AM, Peter Stadler wrote:
>>>> Dear geeks again,
>>>>
>>>> again wondering: just downloaded the current release 2.0.1 from sourceforge (tei-2.0.1.zip) and the editionStmt at tei-2.0.1/xml/tei/p5subset.xml reads<edition>2.0.0 Last updated on<date when="2011-12-16">16th December 2011</date>.</edition>
>>>>
>>>> Does that mean it wasn't updated at all or is just the editionStmt wrong?
>>>>
>>>> Many thanks again
>>>> Peter
>>>>
>>>
>>
>
>


-- 
Dr James Cummings, InfoDev,
Computing Services, University of Oxford