wine 1.8 schedule

[Jerome Leclanche]

At FOSDEM, Stefan said CMST was blocked by d3d10 work, which was
targeted for "some time this year", IIRC.

The problem of the "Stable" vs "Develop" distinction is kind of lost
in a model like Wine's. Users care about things being stable because
they don't want what they currently use to break. However, since Wine
is always playing catch-up to Windows, you have a lot of bits which
are *broken* and get taken care of in further dev releases. So the
usual view that "stable is good, master is buggy" is completely wrong
and it's not an easy thing to explain to users.

1.8 hasn't been talked about yet publicly that I can tell, so I'd say
don't rely on that page too much to tell you exactly when the release
comes out. But doing a stable release for the sake of bringing
bugfixes from dev releases to users seems futile.

J. Leclanche


2015-02-06 22:15 GMT+01:00 Bessières, Marc <marc.bessieres at mykolab.com>:
> Hello,
>
> According to [1] the criteria for Wine 1.8 is the CSMT patch set.
> At FOSDEM 2015 Stefan Doesinger said at one moment something like CSMT is
> not ready yet(I don't remember exactly how
> he formulated it as he wasn't talking specifically about CSMT).
>
> Wine 1.6 was released in July 2013 [2] so more than 18 months ago.
> And 1.6 took 15 months to be released.
>
> A lot of good work has been put into 1.7 branch
>>
>> git rev-list wine-1.6..wine-1.7.35 | wc -l
>
> 7708
>
> Currently still a lot of people are using the 1.6 branch.
> So on the forum Roseanne often has to ask people to upgrade from the stable
> branch to the development one.
> On bugzilla, the triagers very often have to close bugs reported on 1.6 and
> already close in 1.7 (latest example
> a few hours ago [3])
>
> I do not deny that the work to release is negligible (for example I see that
> in bugzilla there are 71 bugs tags as regressions [4] for 1.7).
>
> Maybe not having the CSMT patch set would also not be the best PR possible.
> But the number of commits and bugs solved is clearly good PR and good for
> the users.
>
> I'm not asking for an immediate release for sure, but to start a discussion
> on:
>  - maybe a change of criteria for wine-1.8
>  - a rough schedule for wine-1.8
>
> in order to give most of Wine users the best of what is being produced by
> you guys.
>
> Cheers,
> Marc
>
> [1] http://wiki.winehq.org/WineReleaseCriteria
> [2] https://www.winehq.org/news/2013071801
> [3] https://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=38023
> [4]
> https://bugs.winehq.org/buglist.cgi?bug_status=UNCONFIRMED&bug_status=NEW&bug_status=ASSIGNED&bug_status=REOPENED&keywords=regression%2C%20&keywords_type=allwords&query_format=advanced&version=1.7.0&version=1.7.1&version=1.7.2&version=1.7.3&version=1.7.4&version=1.7.5&version=1.7.6&version=1.7.7&version=1.7.8&version=1.7.9&version=1.7.10&version=1.7.11&version=1.7.12&version=1.7.13&version=1.7.14&version=1.7.15&version=1.7.16&version=1.7.17&version=1.7.18&version=1.7.19&version=1.7.20&version=1.7.21&version=1.7.22&version=1.7.23&version=1.7.24&version=1.7.25&version=1.7.26&version=1.7.27&version=1.7.28&version=1.7.29&version=1.7.30&version=1.7.31&version=1.7.32&version=1.7.33&version=1.7.34&version=1.7.35
>
>