Sufficient 1.2 release criterion: passing all tests on all platforms?

[Scott Ritchie]

Alexandre Julliard wrote:
> Dan Kegel <dank at kegel.com> writes:
> 
>> I've been itching to do another release for a while, since
>> what we have now is a lot better than 1.0.
>> Your position has been that what's blocking release
>> is the lack of a new feature (you listed several, any of which
>> you felt would suffice).
>>
>> How do you feel now?   Are we close to having any of those
>> features, and/or are you willing to consider dropping that
>> requirement?
> 
> 64-bit support isn't too far away, so if we put some more effort into it
> that should be achievable in the near future. There are a number of
> other issues that need some more time to mature, like the OpenGL memory
> thing.  It seems we could reasonably start the release process 3 months
> from now. Of course that would put code freeze right in the middle of
> the Summer of Code...
> 

Starting the release process three months from now would be a really
good thing.  It would put us just in time for the next wave of distro
releases (Ubuntu 9.10 among them), which would get 1.2 to millions of
new desktops.  As it stands, only 135,150 downloaded Wine 1.1.15 from
the apt repository, so about 90% of our users are still on 1.0.1.

I'm not too worried about tabling this year's summer of code until the
next release, in part because we already have the previous summer of
codes' work waiting to be released as it is.

You're obviously right about requiring all tests to pass before making a
release.  I'll add that, in theory, if we had "enough" tests, this would
prevent regressions entirely.

I do have one question though: do we mean regressions relative to any
beta Wine, or just regressions relative to 1.0.1?  I prefer the less
strict approach if it means more frequent releases, but I'm not sure it
matters at this point.

Thanks,
Scott Ritchie